No Arabic abstract
Calibration of neural networks is a topical problem that is becoming increasingly important for real-world use of neural networks. The problem is especially noticeable when using modern neural networks, for which there is significant difference between the model confidence and the confidence it should have. Various strategies have been successfully proposed, yet there is more space for improvements. We propose a novel approach that introduces a differentiable metric for expected calibration error and successfully uses it as an objective for meta-learning, achieving competitive results with state-of-the-art approaches. Our approach presents a new direction of using meta-learning to directly optimize model calibration, which we believe will inspire further work in this promising and new direction.
Uncertainty in probabilistic classifiers predictions is a key concern when models are used to support human decision making, in broader probabilistic pipelines or when sensitive automatic decisions have to be taken. Studies have shown that most models are not intrinsically well calibrated, meaning that their decision scores are not consistent with posterior probabilities. Hence being able to calibrate these models, or enforce calibration while learning them, has regained interest in recent literature. In this context, properly assessing calibration is paramount to quantify new contributions tackling calibration. However, there is room for improvement for commonly used metrics and evaluation of calibration could benefit from deeper analyses. Thus this paper focuses on the empirical evaluation of calibration metrics in the context of classification. More specifically it evaluates different estimators of the Expected Calibration Error ($ECE$), amongst which legacy estimators and some novel ones, proposed in this paper. We build an empirical procedure to quantify the quality of these $ECE$ estimators, and use it to decide which estimator should be used in practice for different settings.
Meta-learning algorithms aim to learn two components: a model that predicts targets for a task, and a base learner that quickly updates that model when given examples from a new task. This additional level of learning can be powerful, but it also creates another potential source for overfitting, since we can now overfit in either the model or the base learner. We describe both of these forms of metalearning overfitting, and demonstrate that they appear experimentally in common meta-learning benchmarks. We then use an information-theoretic framework to discuss meta-augmentation, a way to add randomness that discourages the base learner and model from learning trivial solutions that do not generalize to new tasks. We demonstrate that meta-augmentation produces large complementary benefits to recently proposed meta-regularization techniques.
Building reliable machine learning systems requires that we correctly understand their level of confidence. Calibration measures the degree of accuracy in a models confidence and most research in calibration focuses on techniques to improve an empirical estimate of calibration error, ECE_bin. We introduce a simulation framework that allows us to empirically show that ECE_bin can systematically underestimate or overestimate the true calibration error depending on the nature of model miscalibration, the size of the evaluation data set, and the number of bins. Critically, we find that ECE_bin is more strongly biased for perfectly calibrated models. We propose a simple alternative calibration error metric, ECE_sweep, in which the number of bins is chosen to be as large as possible while preserving monotonicity in the calibration function. Evaluating our measure on distributions fit to neural network confidence scores on CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and ImageNet, we show that ECE_sweep produces a less biased estimator of calibration error and therefore should be used by any researcher wishing to evaluate the calibration of models trained on similar datasets.
Deep neural networks (DNNs) are poorly calibrated when trained in conventional ways. To improve confidence calibration of DNNs, we propose a novel training method, distance-based learning from errors (DBLE). DBLE bases its confidence estimation on distances in the representation space. In DBLE, we first adapt prototypical learning to train classification models. It yields a representation space where the distance between a test sample and its ground truth class center can calibrate the models classification performance. At inference, however, these distances are not available due to the lack of ground truth labels. To circumvent this by inferring the distance for every test sample, we propose to train a confidence model jointly with the classification model. We integrate this into training by merely learning from mis-classified training samples, which we show to be highly beneficial for effective learning. On multiple datasets and DNN architectures, we demonstrate that DBLE outperforms alternative single-model confidence calibration approaches. DBLE also achieves comparable performance with computationally-expensive ensemble approaches with lower computational cost and lower number of parameters.
Meta learning is a promising solution to few-shot learning problems. However, existing meta learning methods are restricted to the scenarios where training and application tasks share the same out-put structure. To obtain a meta model applicable to the tasks with new structures, it is required to collect new training data and repeat the time-consuming meta training procedure. This makes them inefficient or even inapplicable in learning to solve heterogeneous few-shot learning tasks. We thus develop a novel and principled HierarchicalMeta Learning (HML) method. Different from existing methods that only focus on optimizing the adaptability of a meta model to similar tasks, HML also explicitly optimizes its generalizability across heterogeneous tasks. To this end, HML first factorizes a set of similar training tasks into heterogeneous ones and trains the meta model over them at two levels to maximize adaptation and generalization performance respectively. The resultant model can then directly generalize to new tasks. Extensive experiments on few-shot classification and regression problems clearly demonstrate the superiority of HML over fine-tuning and state-of-the-art meta learning approaches in terms of generalization across heterogeneous tasks.