LADDER: Language Driven Slice Discovery and Error Rectification

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.07832v5
• Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 23:50:14 GMT
• Title: LADDER: Language Driven Slice Discovery and Error Rectification
• Authors: Shantanu Ghosh, Rayan Syed, Chenyu Wang, Clare B. Poynton, Shyam Visweswaran, Kayhan Batmanghelich,
• Abstract summary: LADDER: Language Driven slice Discovery and Error Rectification. This paper utilizes the reasoning capabilities of the Large Language Model to analyze complex error patterns and generate testable hypotheses. We validate our method with textbffive image classification datasets.
• Score: 16.146099639239615
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Error slice discovery associates structured patterns with model errors. Existing methods discover error slices by clustering the error-prone samples with similar patterns or assigning discrete attributes to each sample for post-hoc analysis. While these methods aim for interpretability and easier mitigation through reweighting or rebalancing, they may not capture the full complexity of error patterns due to incomplete or missing attributes. Contrary to the existing approach, this paper utilizes the reasoning capabilities of the Large Language Model (LLM) to analyze complex error patterns and generate testable hypotheses. This paper proposes LADDER: Language Driven slice Discovery and Error Rectification. It first projects the model's representation into a language-aligned feature space (eg CLIP) to preserve semantics in the original model feature space. This ensures the accurate retrieval of sentences that highlight the model's errors. Next, the LLM utilizes the sentences and generates hypotheses to discover error slices. Finally, we mitigate the error by fine-tuning the classification head by creating a group-balanced dataset using the hypotheses. Our entire method does not require any attribute annotation, either explicitly or through external tagging models. We validate our method with \textbf{five} image classification datasets.

Related papers

• Detecting Errors through Ensembling Prompts (DEEP): An End-to-End LLM Framework for Detecting Factual Errors [11.07539342949602]
  We propose an end-to-end framework for detecting factual errors in text summarization. Our framework uses a diverse set of LLM prompts to identify factual inconsistencies. We calibrate the ensembled models to produce empirically accurate probabilities that a text is factually consistent or free of hallucination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T18:59:37Z)
• GPT-HateCheck: Can LLMs Write Better Functional Tests for Hate Speech Detection? [50.53312866647302]
  HateCheck is a suite for testing fine-grained model functionalities on synthesized data. We propose GPT-HateCheck, a framework to generate more diverse and realistic functional tests from scratch. Crowd-sourced annotation demonstrates that the generated test cases are of high quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-23T10:02:01Z)
• Understanding and Mitigating Classification Errors Through Interpretable Token Patterns [58.91023283103762]
  Characterizing errors in easily interpretable terms gives insight into whether a classifier is prone to making systematic errors. We propose to discover those patterns of tokens that distinguish correct and erroneous predictions. We show that our method, Premise, performs well in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-18T00:24:26Z)
• Annotating and Detecting Fine-grained Factual Errors for Dialogue Summarization [34.85353544844499]
  We present the first dataset with fine-grained factual error annotations named DIASUMFACT. We define fine-grained factual error detection as a sentence-level multi-label classification problem. We propose an unsupervised model ENDERANKER via candidate ranking using pretrained encoder-decoder models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T00:18:33Z)
• Towards Fine-Grained Information: Identifying the Type and Location of Translation Errors [80.22825549235556]
  Existing approaches can not synchronously consider error position and type. We build an FG-TED model to predict the textbf addition and textbfomission errors. Experiments show that our model can identify both error type and position concurrently, and gives state-of-the-art results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-17T16:20:33Z)
• Understanding Factual Errors in Summarization: Errors, Summarizers, Datasets, Error Detectors [105.12462629663757]
  In this work, we aggregate factuality error annotations from nine existing datasets and stratify them according to the underlying summarization model. We compare performance of state-of-the-art factuality metrics, including recent ChatGPT-based metrics, on this stratified benchmark and show that their performance varies significantly across different types of summarization models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-25T15:26:48Z)
• Label-Descriptive Patterns and their Application to Characterizing Classification Errors [31.272875287136426]
  State-of-the-art deep learning methods achieve human-like performance on many tasks, but make errors nevertheless. Characterizing these errors in easily interpretable terms gives insight into whether a model is prone to making systematic errors, but also gives a way to act and improve the model. In this paper we propose a method that allows us to do so for arbitrary classifiers by mining a small set of patterns that together succinctly describe the input data that is partitioned according to correctness of prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-18T19:42:21Z)
• Defuse: Harnessing Unrestricted Adversarial Examples for Debugging Models Beyond Test Accuracy [11.265020351747916]
  Defuse is a method to automatically discover and correct model errors beyond those available in test data. We propose an algorithm inspired by adversarial machine learning techniques that uses a generative model to find naturally occurring instances misclassified by a model. Defuse corrects the error after fine-tuning while maintaining generalization on the test set.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-11T18:08:42Z)
• Understanding Classifier Mistakes with Generative Models [88.20470690631372]
  Deep neural networks are effective on supervised learning tasks, but have been shown to be brittle. In this paper, we leverage generative models to identify and characterize instances where classifiers fail to generalize. Our approach is agnostic to class labels from the training set which makes it applicable to models trained in a semi-supervised way.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-05T22:13:21Z)
• Good Classifiers are Abundant in the Interpolating Regime [64.72044662855612]
  We develop a methodology to compute precisely the full distribution of test errors among interpolating classifiers. We find that test errors tend to concentrate around a small typical value $varepsilon*$, which deviates substantially from the test error of worst-case interpolating model. Our results show that the usual style of analysis in statistical learning theory may not be fine-grained enough to capture the good generalization performance observed in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-22T21:12:31Z)

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.