Quality In / Quality Out: Data quality more relevant than model choice in anomaly detection with the UGR'16

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.19770v2
• Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2024 07:46:11 GMT
• Title: Quality In / Quality Out: Data quality more relevant than model choice in anomaly detection with the UGR'16
• Authors: José Camacho, Katarzyna Wasielewska, Pablo Espinosa, Marta Fuentes-García,
• Abstract summary: We show that relatively minor modifications on a benchmark dataset cause significantly more impact on model performance than the specific ML technique considered.<n>We also show that the measured model performance is uncertain, as a result of labelling inaccuracies.
• Score: 0.29998889086656577
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Autonomous or self-driving networks are expected to provide a solution to the myriad of extremely demanding new applications with minimal human supervision. For this purpose, the community relies on the development of new Machine Learning (ML) models and techniques. %, like the celebrated Deep Learning (DL). However, ML can only be as good as the data it is fitted with, and data quality is an elusive concept difficult to assess. In this paper, we show that relatively minor modifications on a benchmark dataset (UGR'16, a flow-based real-traffic dataset for anomaly detection) cause significantly more impact on model performance than the specific ML technique considered. We also show that the measured model performance is uncertain, as a result of labelling inaccuracies. Our findings illustrate that the widely adopted approach of comparing a set of models in terms of performance results (e.g., in terms of accuracy or ROC curves) may lead to incorrect conclusions when done without a proper understanding of dataset biases and sensitivity. We contribute a methodology to interpret a model response that can be useful for this understanding.

Related papers

• Linear Discriminant Analysis in Credit Scoring: A Transparent Hybrid Model Approach [9.88281854509076]
  We implement Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) as a feature reduction technique, which reduces the burden of the models complexity. Our hybrid model, XG-DNN, outperformed other models with the highest accuracy of 99.45% and a 99% F1 score with LDA. To interpret model decisions, we have applied 2 different explainable AI techniques named LIME (local) and Morris Sensitivity Analysis (global)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-05T14:21:18Z)
• A Theoretical Framework for AI-driven data quality monitoring in high-volume data environments [1.2753215270475886]
  This paper presents a theoretical framework for an AI-driven data quality monitoring system designed to address the challenges of maintaining data quality in high-volume environments. We examine the limitations of traditional methods in managing the scale, velocity, and variety of big data and propose a conceptual approach leveraging advanced machine learning techniques. Key components include an intelligent data ingestion layer, adaptive preprocessing mechanisms, context-aware feature extraction, and AI-based quality assessment modules.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-11T07:06:36Z)
• AI-Driven Frameworks for Enhancing Data Quality in Big Data Ecosystems: Error_Detection, Correction, and Metadata Integration [0.0]
  This thesis proposes a novel set of interconnected frameworks aimed at enhancing big data quality comprehensively. Firstly, we introduce new quality metrics and a weighted scoring system for precise data quality assessment. Thirdly, we present a generic framework for detecting various quality anomalies using AI models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-06T21:36:45Z)
• Querying Easily Flip-flopped Samples for Deep Active Learning [63.62397322172216]
  Active learning is a machine learning paradigm that aims to improve the performance of a model by strategically selecting and querying unlabeled data. One effective selection strategy is to base it on the model's predictive uncertainty, which can be interpreted as a measure of how informative a sample is. This paper proposes the it least disagree metric (LDM) as the smallest probability of disagreement of the predicted label.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-18T08:12:23Z)
• A Novel Metric for Measuring Data Quality in Classification Applications (extended version) [0.0]
  We introduce and explain a novel metric to measure data quality. This metric is based on the correlated evolution between the classification performance and the deterioration of data. We provide an interpretation of each criterion and examples of assessment levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-13T11:20:09Z)
• Zero-shot Retrieval: Augmenting Pre-trained Models with Search Engines [83.65380507372483]
  Large pre-trained models can dramatically reduce the amount of task-specific data required to solve a problem, but they often fail to capture domain-specific nuances out of the box. This paper shows how to leverage recent advances in NLP and multi-modal learning to augment a pre-trained model with search engine retrieval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T05:33:28Z)
• QualEval: Qualitative Evaluation for Model Improvement [82.73561470966658]
  We propose QualEval, which augments quantitative scalar metrics with automated qualitative evaluation as a vehicle for model improvement. QualEval uses a powerful LLM reasoner and our novel flexible linear programming solver to generate human-readable insights. We demonstrate that leveraging its insights, for example, improves the absolute performance of the Llama 2 model by up to 15% points relative.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-06T00:21:44Z)
• Towards Better Modeling with Missing Data: A Contrastive Learning-based Visual Analytics Perspective [7.577040836988683]
  Missing data can pose a challenge for machine learning (ML) modeling. Current approaches are categorized into feature imputation and label prediction. This study proposes a Contrastive Learning framework to model observed data with missing values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-18T13:16:24Z)
• RLBoost: Boosting Supervised Models using Deep Reinforcement Learning [0.0]
  We present RLBoost, an algorithm that uses deep reinforcement learning strategies to evaluate a particular dataset and obtain a model capable of estimating the quality of any new data. The results of the article show that this model obtains better and more stable results than other state-of-the-art algorithms such as LOO, DataShapley or DVRL.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T14:38:33Z)
• Non-Invasive Fairness in Learning through the Lens of Data Drift [88.37640805363317]
  We show how to improve the fairness of Machine Learning models without altering the data or the learning algorithm. We use a simple but key insight: the divergence of trends between different populations, and, consecutively, between a learned model and minority populations, is analogous to data drift. We explore two strategies (model-splitting and reweighing) to resolve this drift, aiming to improve the overall conformance of models to the underlying data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-30T17:30:42Z)
• A prediction and behavioural analysis of machine learning methods for modelling travel mode choice [0.26249027950824505]
  We conduct a systematic comparison of different modelling approaches, across multiple modelling problems, in terms of the key factors likely to affect model choice. Results indicate that the models with the highest disaggregate predictive performance provide poorer estimates of behavioural indicators and aggregate mode shares. It is also observed that the MNL model performs robustly in a variety of situations, though ML techniques can improve the estimates of behavioural indices such as Willingness to Pay.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-11T11:10:32Z)
• Striving for data-model efficiency: Identifying data externalities on group performance [75.17591306911015]
  Building trustworthy, effective, and responsible machine learning systems hinges on understanding how differences in training data and modeling decisions interact to impact predictive performance. We focus on a particular type of data-model inefficiency, in which adding training data from some sources can actually lower performance evaluated on key sub-groups of the population. Our results indicate that data-efficiency is a key component of both accurate and trustworthy machine learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-11T16:48:27Z)
• Building Robust Machine Learning Models for Small Chemical Science Data: The Case of Shear Viscosity [3.4761212729163313]
  We train several Machine Learning models to predict the shear viscosity of a Lennard-Jones (LJ) fluid. Specifically, the issues related to model selection, performance estimation and uncertainty quantification were investigated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-23T07:33:14Z)
• Augmented Bilinear Network for Incremental Multi-Stock Time-Series Classification [83.23129279407271]
  We propose a method to efficiently retain the knowledge available in a neural network pre-trained on a set of securities. In our method, the prior knowledge encoded in a pre-trained neural network is maintained by keeping existing connections fixed. This knowledge is adjusted for the new securities by a set of augmented connections, which are optimized using the new data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-23T18:54:10Z)
• DataPerf: Benchmarks for Data-Centric AI Development [81.03754002516862]
  DataPerf is a community-led benchmark suite for evaluating ML datasets and data-centric algorithms. We provide an open, online platform with multiple rounds of challenges to support this iterative development. The benchmarks, online evaluation platform, and baseline implementations are open source.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-20T17:47:54Z)
• Leveraging Unlabeled Data to Predict Out-of-Distribution Performance [63.740181251997306]
  Real-world machine learning deployments are characterized by mismatches between the source (training) and target (test) distributions. In this work, we investigate methods for predicting the target domain accuracy using only labeled source data and unlabeled target data. We propose Average Thresholded Confidence (ATC), a practical method that learns a threshold on the model's confidence, predicting accuracy as the fraction of unlabeled examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-11T23:01:12Z)
• Complementary Ensemble Learning [1.90365714903665]
  We derive a technique to improve performance of state-of-the-art deep learning models. Specifically, we train auxiliary models which are able to complement state-of-the-art model uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-09T03:23:05Z)
• Exploring the Efficacy of Automatically Generated Counterfactuals for Sentiment Analysis [17.811597734603144]
  We propose an approach to automatically generating counterfactual data for data augmentation and explanation. A comprehensive evaluation on several different datasets and using a variety of state-of-the-art benchmarks demonstrate how our approach can achieve significant improvements in model performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-29T10:27:01Z)
• 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)
• How Training Data Impacts Performance in Learning-based Control [67.7875109298865]
  This paper derives an analytical relationship between the density of the training data and the control performance. We formulate a quality measure for the data set, which we refer to as $rho$-gap. We show how the $rho$-gap can be applied to a feedback linearizing control law.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-25T12:13:49Z)

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.