SureMap: Simultaneous Mean Estimation for Single-Task and Multi-Task Disaggregated Evaluation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.09730v1
• Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 17:53:35 GMT
• Title: SureMap: Simultaneous Mean Estimation for Single-Task and Multi-Task Disaggregated Evaluation
• Authors: Mikhail Khodak, Lester Mackey, Alexandra Chouldechova, Miroslav Dudík,
• Abstract summary: Disaggregated evaluation -- estimation of performance of a machine learning model on different subpopulations -- is a core task when assessing performance and group-fairness of AI systems. We develop SureMap that has high estimation accuracy for both multi-task and single-task disaggregated evaluations of blackbox models. Our method combines maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimation using a well-chosen prior together with cross-validation-free tuning via Stein's unbiased risk estimate (SURE)
• Score: 75.56845750400116
• License:
• Abstract: Disaggregated evaluation -- estimation of performance of a machine learning model on different subpopulations -- is a core task when assessing performance and group-fairness of AI systems. A key challenge is that evaluation data is scarce, and subpopulations arising from intersections of attributes (e.g., race, sex, age) are often tiny. Today, it is common for multiple clients to procure the same AI model from a model developer, and the task of disaggregated evaluation is faced by each customer individually. This gives rise to what we call the multi-task disaggregated evaluation problem, wherein multiple clients seek to conduct a disaggregated evaluation of a given model in their own data setting (task). In this work we develop a disaggregated evaluation method called SureMap that has high estimation accuracy for both multi-task and single-task disaggregated evaluations of blackbox models. SureMap's efficiency gains come from (1) transforming the problem into structured simultaneous Gaussian mean estimation and (2) incorporating external data, e.g., from the AI system creator or from their other clients. Our method combines maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimation using a well-chosen prior together with cross-validation-free tuning via Stein's unbiased risk estimate (SURE). We evaluate SureMap on disaggregated evaluation tasks in multiple domains, observing significant accuracy improvements over several strong competitors.

Related papers

• Improving Bias Correction Standards by Quantifying its Effects on Treatment Outcomes [54.18828236350544]
  Propensity score matching (PSM) addresses selection biases by selecting comparable populations for analysis. Different matching methods can produce significantly different Average Treatment Effects (ATE) for the same task, even when meeting all validation criteria. To address this issue, we introduce a novel metric, A2A, to reduce the number of valid matches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T12:42:24Z)
• Self-Training with Pseudo-Label Scorer for Aspect Sentiment Quad Prediction [54.23208041792073]
  Aspect Sentiment Quad Prediction (ASQP) aims to predict all quads (aspect term, aspect category, opinion term, sentiment polarity) for a given review. A key challenge in the ASQP task is the scarcity of labeled data, which limits the performance of existing methods. We propose a self-training framework with a pseudo-label scorer, wherein a scorer assesses the match between reviews and their pseudo-labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-26T05:30:21Z)
• MAP: Low-compute Model Merging with Amortized Pareto Fronts via Quadratic Approximation [80.47072100963017]
  We introduce a novel and low-compute algorithm, Model Merging with Amortized Pareto Front (MAP) MAP efficiently identifies a set of scaling coefficients for merging multiple models, reflecting the trade-offs involved. We also introduce Bayesian MAP for scenarios with a relatively low number of tasks and Nested MAP for situations with a high number of tasks, further reducing the computational cost of evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T17:55:25Z)
• Scalable Decentralized Algorithms for Online Personalized Mean Estimation [12.002609934938224]
  This study focuses on a simplified version of the overarching problem, where each agent collects samples from a real-valued distribution over time to estimate its mean. We introduce two collaborative mean estimation algorithms: one draws inspiration from belief propagation, while the other employs a consensus-based approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T08:30:46Z)
• Do Smaller Language Models Answer Contextualised Questions Through Memorisation Or Generalisation? [8.51696622847778]
  A distinction is often drawn between a model's ability to predict a label for an evaluation sample that is directly memorised from highly similar training samples. We propose a method of identifying evaluation samples for which it is very unlikely our model would have memorised the answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-21T04:06:08Z)
• Accounting for multiplicity in machine learning benchmark performance [0.0]
  Using the highest-ranked performance as an estimate for state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance is a biased estimator, giving overly optimistic results. In this article, we provide a probability distribution for the case of multiple classifiers so that known analyses methods can be engaged and a better SOTA estimate can be provided.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-10T10:32:18Z)
• CARMS: Categorical-Antithetic-REINFORCE Multi-Sample Gradient Estimator [60.799183326613395]
  We propose an unbiased estimator for categorical random variables based on multiple mutually negatively correlated (jointly antithetic) samples. CARMS combines REINFORCE with copula based sampling to avoid duplicate samples and reduce its variance, while keeping the estimator unbiased using importance sampling. We evaluate CARMS on several benchmark datasets on a generative modeling task, as well as a structured output prediction task, and find it to outperform competing methods including a strong self-control baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-26T20:14:30Z)
• Model-based metrics: Sample-efficient estimates of predictive model subpopulation performance [11.994417027132807]
  Machine learning models $-$ now commonly developed to screen, diagnose, or predict health conditions are evaluated with a variety of performance metrics. Subpopulation performance metrics are typically computed using only data from that subgroup, resulting in higher variance estimates for smaller groups. We propose using an evaluation model $-$ a model that describes the conditional distribution of the predictive model score $-$ to form model-based metric (MBM) estimates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-25T19:06:34Z)
• A Critical Assessment of State-of-the-Art in Entity Alignment [1.7725414095035827]
  We investigate two state-of-the-art (SotA) methods for the task of Entity Alignment in Knowledge Graphs. We first carefully examine the benchmarking process and identify several shortcomings, which make the results reported in the original works not always comparable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-30T15:09:19Z)
• Meta-Learned Confidence for Few-shot Learning [60.6086305523402]
  A popular transductive inference technique for few-shot metric-based approaches, is to update the prototype of each class with the mean of the most confident query examples. We propose to meta-learn the confidence for each query sample, to assign optimal weights to unlabeled queries. We validate our few-shot learning model with meta-learned confidence on four benchmark datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-27T10:22:17Z)

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.