ML4ML: Automated Invariance Testing for Machine Learning Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2109.12926v1
• Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2021 10:23:44 GMT
• Title: ML4ML: Automated Invariance Testing for Machine Learning Models
• Authors: Zukang Liao, Pengfei Zhang and Min Chen
• Abstract summary: We propose an automatic testing framework that is applicable to a variety of invariance qualities. We employ machine learning techniques for analysing such imagery'' testing data automatically, hence facilitating ML4ML. Our testing results show that the trained ML4ML assessors can perform such analytical tasks with sufficient accuracy.
• Score: 7.017320068977301
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: In machine learning workflows, determining invariance qualities of a model is a common testing procedure. In this paper, we propose an automatic testing framework that is applicable to a variety of invariance qualities. We draw an analogy between invariance testing and medical image analysis and propose to use variance matrices as ``imagery'' testing data. This enables us to employ machine learning techniques for analysing such ``imagery'' testing data automatically, hence facilitating ML4ML (machine learning for machine learning). We demonstrate the effectiveness and feasibility of the proposed framework by developing ML4ML models (assessors) for determining rotation-, brightness-, and size-variances of a collection of neural networks. Our testing results show that the trained ML4ML assessors can perform such analytical tasks with sufficient accuracy.

Related papers

• Context-Aware Testing: A New Paradigm for Model Testing with Large Language Models [49.06068319380296]
  We introduce context-aware testing (CAT) which uses context as an inductive bias to guide the search for meaningful model failures. We instantiate the first CAT system, SMART Testing, which employs large language models to hypothesize relevant and likely failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-31T15:06:16Z)
• Attribute-to-Delete: Machine Unlearning via Datamodel Matching [65.13151619119782]
  Machine unlearning -- efficiently removing a small "forget set" training data on a pre-divertrained machine learning model -- has recently attracted interest. Recent research shows that machine unlearning techniques do not hold up in such a challenging setting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-30T17:20:10Z)
• Analytical results for uncertainty propagation through trained machine learning regression models [0.10878040851637999]
  This paper addresses the challenge of uncertainty propagation through trained/fixed machine learning (ML) regression models. We present numerical experiments in which we validate our methods and compare them with a Monte Carlo approach from a computational efficiency point of view.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-17T10:16:20Z)
• Machine Learning Data Suitability and Performance Testing Using Fault Injection Testing Framework [0.0]
  This paper presents the Fault Injection for Undesirable Learning in input Data (FIUL-Data) testing framework. Data mutators explore vulnerabilities of ML systems against the effects of different fault injections. This paper evaluates the framework using data from analytical chemistry, comprising retention time measurements of anti-sense oligonucleotides.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-20T12:58:35Z)
• Zero-shot Model Diagnosis [80.36063332820568]
  A common approach to evaluate deep learning models is to build a labeled test set with attributes of interest and assess how well it performs. This paper argues the case that Zero-shot Model Diagnosis (ZOOM) is possible without the need for a test set nor labeling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-27T17:59:33Z)
• Learning continuous models for continuous physics [94.42705784823997]
  We develop a test based on numerical analysis theory to validate machine learning models for science and engineering applications. Our results illustrate how principled numerical analysis methods can be coupled with existing ML training/testing methodologies to validate models for science and engineering applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-17T07:56:46Z)
• QuantifyML: How Good is my Machine Learning Model? [0.0]
  QuantifyML aims to quantify the extent to which machine learning models have learned and generalized from the given data. The formula is analyzed with off-the-shelf model counters to obtain precise counts with respect to different model behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-25T01:56:01Z)
• ALT-MAS: A Data-Efficient Framework for Active Testing of Machine Learning Algorithms [58.684954492439424]
  We propose a novel framework to efficiently test a machine learning model using only a small amount of labeled test data. The idea is to estimate the metrics of interest for a model-under-test using Bayesian neural network (BNN)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-11T12:14:04Z)
• Mutation Testing framework for Machine Learning [0.0]
  Failure of Machine Learning Models can lead to severe consequences in terms of loss of life or property. Developers, scientists, and ML community around the world, must build a highly reliable test architecture for critical ML application. This article provides an insight journey of Machine Learning Systems (MLS) testing, its evolution, current paradigm and future work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-19T18:02:31Z)
• Transfer Learning without Knowing: Reprogramming Black-box Machine Learning Models with Scarce Data and Limited Resources [78.72922528736011]
  We propose a novel approach, black-box adversarial reprogramming (BAR), that repurposes a well-trained black-box machine learning model. Using zeroth order optimization and multi-label mapping techniques, BAR can reprogram a black-box ML model solely based on its input-output responses. BAR outperforms state-of-the-art methods and yields comparable performance to the vanilla adversarial reprogramming method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-17T01:52:34Z)
• Testing Monotonicity of Machine Learning Models [0.5330240017302619]
  We propose verification-based testing of monotonicity, i.e., the formal computation of test inputs on a white-box model via verification technology. On the white-box model, the space of test inputs can be systematically explored by a directed computation of test cases. The empirical evaluation on 90 black-box models shows verification-based testing can outperform adaptive random testing as well as property-based techniques with respect to effectiveness and efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-27T17:38:06Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.