Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userCombining Ensembles and Data Augmentation can Harm your Calibration
260
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Ensemble methods which average over multiple neural network predictions are a simple approach to improve a models calibration and robustness. Similarly, data augmentation techniques, which encode prior information in the form of invariant feature transformations, are effective for improving calibration and robustness. In this paper, we show a surprising pathology: combining ensembles and data augmentation can harm model calibration. This leads to a trade-off in practice, whereby improved accuracy by combining the two techniques comes at the expense of calibration. On the other hand, selecting only one of the techniques ensures good uncertainty estimates at the expense of accuracy. We investigate this pathology and identify a compounding under-confidence among methods which marginalize over sets of weights and data augmentation techniques which soften labels. Finally, we propose a simple correction, achieving the best of both worlds with significant accuracy and calibration gains over using only ensembles or data augmentation individually. Applying the correction produces new state-of-the art in uncertainty calibration across CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and ImageNet.
rate research
Read More
Uncertainty estimates help to identify ambiguous, novel, or anomalous inputs, but the reliable quantification of uncertainty has proven to be challenging for modern deep networks. In order to improve uncertainty estimation, we propose On-Manifold Adversarial Data Augmentation or OMADA, which specifically attempts to generate the most challenging examples by following an on-manifold adversarial attack path in the latent space of an autoencoder-based generative model that closely approximates decision boundaries between two or more classes. On a variety of datasets as well as on multiple diverse network architectures, OMADA consistently yields more accurate and better calibrated classifiers than baseline models, and outperforms competing approaches such as Mixup, as well as achieving similar performance to (at times better than) post-processing calibration methods such as temperature scaling. Variants of OMADA can employ different sampling schemes for ambiguous on-manifold examples based on the entropy of their estimated soft labels, which exhibit specific strengths for generalization, calibration of predicted uncertainty, or detection of out-of-distribution inputs.
Data augmentation has been widely used to improve generalizability of machine learning models. However, comparatively little work studies data augmentation for graphs. This is largely due to the complex, non-Euclidean structure of graphs, which limits possible manipulation operations. Augmentation operations commonly used in vision and language have no analogs for graphs. Our work studies graph data augmentation for graph neural networks (GNNs) in the context of improving semi-supervised node-classification. We discuss practical and theoretical motivations, considerations and strategies for graph data augmentation. Our work shows that neural edge predictors can effectively encode class-homophilic structure to promote intra-class edges and demote inter-class edges in given graph structure, and our main contribution introduces the GAug graph data augmentation framework, which leverages these insights to improve performance in GNN-based node classification via edge prediction. Extensive experiments on multiple benchmarks show that augmentation via GAug improves performance across GNN architectures and datasets.
There is a set of data augmentation techniques that ablate parts of the input at random. These include input dropout, cutout, and random erasing. We term these techniques ablated data augmentation. Though these techniques seems similar in spirit and have shown success in improving model performance in a variety of domains, we do not yet have a mathematical understanding of the differences between these techniques like we do for other regularization techniques like L1 or L2. First, we study a formal model of mean ablated data augmentation and inverted dropout for linear regression. We prove that ablated data augmentation is equivalent to optimizing the ordinary least squares objective along with a penalty that we call the Contribution Covariance Penalty and inverted dropout, a more common implementation than dropout in popular frameworks, is equivalent to optimizing the ordinary least squares objective along with Modified L2. For deep networks, we demonstrate an empirical version of the result if we replace contributions with attributions and coefficients with average gradients, i.e., the Contribution Covariance Penalty and Modified L2 Penalty drop with the increase of the corresponding ablated data augmentation across a variety of networks.
Common fairness definitions in machine learning focus on balancing notions of disparity and utility. In this work, we study fairness in the context of risk disparity among sub-populations. We are interested in learning models that minimize performance discrepancies across sensitive groups without causing unnecessary harm. This is relevant to high-stakes domains such as healthcare, where non-maleficence is a core principle. We formalize this objective using Pareto frontiers, and provide analysis, based on recent works in fairness, to exemplify scenarios were perfect fairness might not be feasible without doing unnecessary harm. We present a methodology for training neural networks that achieve our goal by dynamically re-balancing subgroups risks. We argue that even in domains where fairness at cost is required, finding a non-unnecessary-harm fairness model is the optimal initial step. We demonstrate this methodology on real case-studies of predicting ICU patient mortality, and classifying skin lesions from dermatoscopic images.
Reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms usually require a substantial amount of interaction data and perform well only for specific tasks in a fixed environment. In some scenarios such as healthcare, however, usually only few records are available for each patient, and patients may show different responses to the same treatment, impeding the application of current RL algorithms to learn optimal policies. To address the issues of mechanism heterogeneity and related data scarcity, we propose a data-efficient RL algorithm that exploits structural causal models (SCMs) to model the state dynamics, which are estimated by leveraging both commonalities and differences across subjects. The learned SCM enables us to counterfactually reason what would have happened had another treatment been taken. It helps avoid real (possibly risky) exploration and mitigates the issue that limited experiences lead to biased policies. We propose counterfactual RL algorithms to learn both population-level and individual-level policies. We show that counterfactual outcomes are identifiable under mild conditions and that Q- learning on the counterfactual-based augmented data set converges to the optimal value function. Experimental results on synthetic and real-world data demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed approach.
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
