اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدMitigating Bias in Calibration Error Estimation
123
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
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.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
In recent years the ubiquitous deployment of AI has posed great concerns in regards to algorithmic bias, discrimination, and fairness. Compared to traditional forms of bias or discrimination caused by humans, algorithmic bias generated by AI is more
abstract and unintuitive therefore more difficult to explain and mitigate. A clear gap exists in the current literature on evaluating and mitigating bias in pruned neural networks. In this work, we strive to tackle the challenging issues of evaluating, mitigating, and explaining induced bias in pruned neural networks. Our paper makes three contributions. First, we propose two simple yet effective metrics, Combined Error Variance (CEV) and Symmetric Distance Error (SDE), to quantitatively evaluate the induced bias prevention quality of pruned models. Second, we demonstrate that knowledge distillation can mitigate induced bias in pruned neural networks, even with unbalanced datasets. Third, we reveal that model similarity has strong correlations with pruning induced bias, which provides a powerful method to explain why bias occurs in pruned neural networks. Our code is available at https://github.com/codestar12/pruning-distilation-bias
Current large-scale language models can be politically biased as a result of the data they are trained on, potentially causing serious problems when they are deployed in real-world settings. In this paper, we describe metrics for measuring political
bias in GPT-2 generation and propose a reinforcement learning (RL) framework for mitigating political biases in generated text. By using rewards from word embeddings or a classifier, our RL framework guides debiased generation without having access to the training data or requiring the model to be retrained. In empirical experiments on three attributes sensitive to political bias (gender, location, and topic), our methods reduced bias according to both our metrics and human evaluation, while maintaining readability and semantic coherence.
Delusional bias is a fundamental source of error in approximate Q-learning. To date, the only techniques that explicitly address delusion require comprehensive search using tabular value estimates. In this paper, we develop efficient methods to mitig
ate delusional bias by training Q-approximators with labels that are consistent with the underlying greedy policy class. We introduce a simple penalization scheme that encourages Q-labels used across training batches to remain (jointly) consistent with the expressible policy class. We also propose a search framework that allows multiple Q-approximators to be generated and tracked, thus mitigating the effect of premature (implicit) policy commitments. Experimental results demonstrate that these methods can improve the performance of Q-learning in a variety of Atari games, sometimes dramatically.
As methods to create discrimination-aware models develop, they focus on centralized ML, leaving federated learning (FL) unexplored. FL is a rising approach for collaborative ML, in which an aggregator orchestrates multiple parties to train a global m
odel without sharing their training data. In this paper, we discuss causes of bias in FL and propose three pre-processing and in-processing methods to mitigate bias, without compromising data privacy, a key FL requirement. As data heterogeneity among parties is one of the challenging characteristics of FL, we conduct experiments over several data distributions to analyze their effects on model performance, fairness metrics, and bias learning patterns. We conduct a comprehensive analysis of our proposed techniques, the results demonstrating that these methods are effective even when parties have skewed data distributions or as little as 20% of parties employ the methods.
Data that is gathered adaptively --- via bandit algorithms, for example --- exhibits bias. This is true both when gathering simple numeric valued data --- the empirical means kept track of by stochastic bandit algorithms are biased downwards --- and
when gathering more complicated data --- running hypothesis tests on complex data gathered via contextual bandit algorithms leads to false discovery. In this paper, we show that this problem is mitigated if the data collection procedure is differentially private. This lets us both bound the bias of simple numeric valued quantities (like the empirical means of stochastic bandit algorithms), and correct the p-values of hypothesis tests run on the adaptively gathered data. Moreover, there exist differentially private bandit algorithms with near optimal regret bounds: we apply existing theorems in the simple stochastic case, and give a new analysis for linear contextual bandits. We complement our theoretical results with experiments validating our theory.
الأسئلة المقترحة
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
