Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userGraph topology inference benchmarks for machine learning
112
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Graphs are nowadays ubiquitous in the fields of signal processing and machine learning. As a tool used to express relationships between objects, graphs can be deployed to various ends: I) clustering of vertices, II) semi-supervised classification of vertices, III) supervised classification of graph signals, and IV) denoising of graph signals. However, in many practical cases graphs are not explicitly available and must therefore be inferred from data. Validation is a challenging endeavor that naturally depends on the downstream task for which the graph is learnt. Accordingly, it has often been difficult to compare the efficacy of different algorithms. In this work, we introduce several ease-to-use and publicly released benchmarks specifically designed to reveal the relative merits and limitations of graph inference methods. We also contrast some of the most prominent techniques in the literature.
rate research
Read More
Despite the availability of benchmark machine learning (ML) repositories (e.g., UCI, OpenML), there is no standard evaluation strategy yet capable of pointing out which is the best set of datasets to serve as gold standard to test different ML algorithms. In recent studies, Item Response Theory (IRT) has emerged as a new approach to elucidate what should be a good ML benchmark. This work applied IRT to explore the well-known OpenML-CC18 benchmark to identify how suitable it is on the evaluation of classifiers. Several classifiers ranging from classical to ensembles ones were evaluated using IRT models, which could simultaneously estimate dataset difficulty and classifiers ability. The Glicko-2 rating system was applied on the top of IRT to summarize the innate ability and aptitude of classifiers. It was observed that not all datasets from OpenML-CC18 are really useful to evaluate classifiers. Most datasets evaluated in this work (84%) contain easy instances in general (e.g., around 10% of difficult instances only). Also, 80% of the instances in half of this benchmark are very discriminating ones, which can be of great use for pairwise algorithm comparison, but not useful to push classifiers abilities. This paper presents this new evaluation methodology based on IRT as well as the tool decodIRT, developed to guide IRT estimation over ML benchmarks.
Strong empirical evidence that one machine-learning algorithm A outperforms another one B ideally calls for multiple trials optimizing the learning pipeline over sources of variation such as data sampling, data augmentation, parameter initialization, and hyperparameters choices. This is prohibitively expensive, and corners are cut to reach conclusions. We model the whole benchmarking process, revealing that variance due to data sampling, parameter initialization and hyperparameter choice impact markedly the results. We analyze the predominant comparison methods used today in the light of this variance. We show a counter-intuitive result that adding more sources of variation to an imperfect estimator approaches better the ideal estimator at a 51 times reduction in compute cost. Building on these results, we study the error rate of detecting improvements, on five different deep-learning tasks/architectures. This study leads us to propose recommendations for performance comparisons.
The transfer learning toolkit wraps the codes of 17 transfer learning models and provides integrated interfaces, allowing users to use those models by calling a simple function. It is easy for primary researchers to use this toolkit and to choose proper models for real-world applications. The toolkit is written in Python and distributed under MIT open source license. In this paper, the current state of this toolkit is described and the necessary environment setting and usage are introduced.
We propose a new graph kernel for graph classification and comparison using Ollivier Ricci curvature. The Ricci curvature of an edge in a graph describes the connectivity in the local neighborhood. An edge in a densely connected neighborhood has positive curvature and an edge serving as a local bridge has negative curvature. We use the edge curvature distribution to form a graph kernel which is then used to compare and cluster graphs. The curvature kernel uses purely the graph topology and thereby works for settings when node attributes are not available.
Classification-as-a-Service (CaaS) is widely deployed today in machine intelligence stacks for a vastly diverse set of applications including anything from medical prognosis to computer vision tasks to natural language processing to identity fraud detection. The computing power required for training complex models on large datasets to perform inference to solve these problems can be very resource-intensive. A CaaS provider may cheat a customer by fraudulently bypassing expensive training procedures in favor of weaker, less computationally-intensive algorithms which yield results of reduced quality. Given a classification service supplier $S$, intermediary CaaS provider $P$ claiming to use $S$ as a classification backend, and customer $C$, our work addresses the following questions: (i) how can $P$s claim to be using $S$ be verified by $C$? (ii) how might $S$ make performance guarantees that may be verified by $C$? and (iii) how might one design a decentralized system that incentivizes service proofing and accountability? To this end, we propose a variety of methods for $C$ to evaluate the service claims made by $P$ using probabilistic performance metrics, instance seeding, and steganography. We also propose a method of measuring the robustness of a model using a blackbox adversarial procedure, which may then be used as a benchmark or comparison to a claim made by $S$. Finally, we propose the design of a smart contract-based decentralized system that incentivizes service accountability to serve as a trusted Quality of Service (QoS) auditor.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
