Pearls from Pebbles: Improved Confidence Functions for Auto-labeling
0
📉
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Auto-labeling techniques produce labeled training data with minimal manual labeling
- Threshold-based auto-labeling (TBAL) uses a confidence threshold to label unlabeled data
- Many models produce overconfident scores, leading to poor TBAL performance
- Applying off-the-shelf calibration methods does not fully solve the overconfidence issue
Plain English Explanation
Auto-labeling is a family of techniques that can generate labeled training data without the need for extensive manual labeling. One prominent variant is threshold-based auto-labeling (TBAL), which works by finding a confidence score threshold above which the model can accurately label unlabeled data points.
However, a common problem with many machine learning models is that they tend to produce overconfident scores, leading to poor performance when using TBAL. While applying off-the-shelf calibration methods could help address this, they still fall short of providing a complete solution.
Instead of relying on ad-hoc choices of confidence functions, the researchers propose a framework for studying the optimal confidence function for TBAL. They develop a practical version of this framework, resulting in a new method called Colander (Confidence functions for Efficient and Reliable Auto-labeling), which is specifically designed to maximize performance in TBAL systems.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces a framework for studying the optimal confidence function for threshold-based auto-labeling (TBAL) systems. Many models are known to produce overconfident scores, leading to poor TBAL performance. While calibration methods can help, they do not fully solve the problem.
The researchers develop a tractable version of the optimal confidence function framework, resulting in a new post-hoc method called Colander. Colander is designed to maximize performance in TBAL systems by producing better-calibrated confidence scores.
The paper presents an extensive empirical evaluation of Colander, comparing it against other calibration-focused methods. The results show that Colander can achieve up to 60% improvements in coverage over the baselines, while maintaining auto-labeling error below 5% and using the same amount of labeled data as the baselines.
Critical Analysis
The paper presents a well-designed framework and a practical implementation in the form of Colander, which appears to be a promising solution for improving the performance of threshold-based auto-labeling systems. However, the authors do acknowledge some potential limitations and areas for further research.
One aspect that could be explored further is the sensitivity of Colander's performance to the choice of the underlying machine learning model. The paper focuses on evaluating Colander in the context of a specific set of models, and it would be valuable to understand how it might perform with a wider range of model architectures and domains.
Additionally, the paper does not delve into the computational complexity and scalability of the Colander method, which could be an important consideration for real-world applications. Investigating the trade-offs between the performance gains and the computational overhead would be a useful addition to the analysis.
Conclusion
This paper presents a novel framework and a practical implementation, Colander, for improving the performance of threshold-based auto-labeling systems. By addressing the common problem of model overconfidence, Colander can achieve significant improvements in coverage while maintaining low auto-labeling error.
The research contributes to the ongoing efforts in the machine learning community to develop more reliable and efficient data labeling techniques, which are essential for building high-quality machine learning models. The insights and methods presented in this paper could have far-reaching implications for various applications that rely on auto-labeling, such as natural language processing, computer vision, and beyond.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
📉
0
Pearls from Pebbles: Improved Confidence Functions for Auto-labeling
Harit Vishwakarma (Yi), Reid (Yi), Chen, Sui Jiet Tay, Satya Sai Srinath Namburi, Frederic Sala, Ramya Korlakai Vinayak
Auto-labeling is an important family of techniques that produce labeled training sets with minimum manual labeling. A prominent variant, threshold-based auto-labeling (TBAL), works by finding a threshold on a model's confidence scores above which it can accurately label unlabeled data points. However, many models are known to produce overconfident scores, leading to poor TBAL performance. While a natural idea is to apply off-the-shelf calibration methods to alleviate the overconfidence issue, such methods still fall short. Rather than experimenting with ad-hoc choices of confidence functions, we propose a framework for studying the emph{optimal} TBAL confidence function. We develop a tractable version of the framework to obtain texttt{Colander} (Confidence functions for Efficient and Reliable Auto-labeling), a new post-hoc method specifically designed to maximize performance in TBAL systems. We perform an extensive empirical evaluation of our method texttt{Colander} and compare it against methods designed for calibration. texttt{Colander} achieves up to 60% improvements on coverage over the baselines while maintaining auto-labeling error below $5%$ and using the same amount of labeled data as the baselines.
Read more4/26/2024
0
AutoCV: Empowering Reasoning with Automated Process Labeling via Confidence Variation
Jianqiao Lu, Zhiyang Dou, Hongru Wang, Zeyu Cao, Jianbo Dai, Yingjia Wan, Yinya Huang, Zhijiang Guo
In this work, we propose a novel method named textbf{Auto}mated Process Labeling via textbf{C}onfidence textbf{V}ariation (textbf{textsc{AutoCV}}) to enhance the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) by automatically annotating the reasoning steps. Our approach begins by training a verification model on the correctness of final answers, enabling it to generate automatic process annotations. This verification model assigns a confidence score to each reasoning step, indicating the probability of arriving at the correct final answer from that point onward. We detect relative changes in the verification's confidence scores across reasoning steps to automatically annotate the reasoning process. This alleviates the need for numerous manual annotations or the high computational costs associated with model-induced annotation approaches. We experimentally validate that the confidence variations learned by the verification model trained on the final answer correctness can effectively identify errors in the reasoning steps. Subsequently, we demonstrate that the process annotations generated by textsc{AutoCV} can improve the accuracy of the verification model in selecting the correct answer from multiple outputs generated by LLMs. Notably, we achieve substantial improvements across five datasets in mathematics and commonsense reasoning. The source code of textsc{AutoCV} is available at url{https://github.com/rookie-joe/AUTOCV}.
Read more5/30/2024
0
Pseudo-label Learning with Calibrated Confidence Using an Energy-based Model
Masahito Toba, Seiichi Uchida, Hideaki Hayashi
In pseudo-labeling (PL), which is a type of semi-supervised learning, pseudo-labels are assigned based on the confidence scores provided by the classifier; therefore, accurate confidence is important for successful PL. In this study, we propose a PL algorithm based on an energy-based model (EBM), which is referred to as the energy-based PL (EBPL). In EBPL, a neural network-based classifier and an EBM are jointly trained by sharing their feature extraction parts. This approach enables the model to learn both the class decision boundary and input data distribution, enhancing confidence calibration during network training. The experimental results demonstrate that EBPL outperforms the existing PL method in semi-supervised image classification tasks, with superior confidence calibration error and recognition accuracy.
Read more4/16/2024
0
Multicalibration for Confidence Scoring in LLMs
Gianluca Detommaso, Martin Bertran, Riccardo Fogliato, Aaron Roth
This paper proposes the use of multicalibration to yield interpretable and reliable confidence scores for outputs generated by large language models (LLMs). Multicalibration asks for calibration not just marginally, but simultaneously across various intersecting groupings of the data. We show how to form groupings for prompt/completion pairs that are correlated with the probability of correctness via two techniques: clustering within an embedding space, and self-annotation - querying the LLM by asking it various yes-or-no questions about the prompt. We also develop novel variants of multicalibration algorithms that offer performance improvements by reducing their tendency to overfit. Through systematic benchmarking across various question answering datasets and LLMs, we show how our techniques can yield confidence scores that provide substantial improvements in fine-grained measures of both calibration and accuracy compared to existing methods.
Read more4/9/2024