Bayesian Data Selection
2406.12560
0
0
📊
Abstract
A wide range of machine learning algorithms iteratively add data to the training sample. Examples include semi-supervised learning, active learning, multi-armed bandits, and Bayesian optimization. We embed this kind of data addition into decision theory by framing data selection as a decision problem. This paves the way for finding Bayes-optimal selections of data. For the illustrative case of self-training in semi-supervised learning, we derive the respective Bayes criterion. We further show that deploying this criterion mitigates the issue of confirmation bias by empirically assessing our method for generalized linear models, semi-parametric generalized additive models, and Bayesian neural networks on simulated and real-world data.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- Introduces a Bayesian approach to the problem of data selection, which is an important task in machine learning and data analysis
- Presents a framework for viewing data selection as a decision problem, where the goal is to choose a subset of data that will lead to the best model or outcome
- Provides an example application of Bayesian pseudo-label selection (PLS), a technique for selecting unlabeled data to augment a supervised learning task
Plain English Explanation
Choosing the right data is crucial for building accurate and effective machine learning models. Bayesian Data Selection proposes a Bayesian approach to this problem, treating data selection as a decision-making process. The key idea is to use Bayesian reasoning to determine which data points are most likely to improve the model's performance.
For example, in a supervised learning task, you may have access to a large pool of unlabeled data in addition to your labeled training set. Bayesian PLeaSe! is a technique that can help you select the most informative unlabeled data points to add to your training set, boosting the model's performance without the need for costly manual labeling.
By framing data selection as a decision problem, this research provides a principled framework for making better use of unlabeled data and building small, interpretable models that generalize well. The techniques described can be applied to a wide range of self-training and active learning scenarios.
Technical Explanation
The Bayesian Data Selection framework models the data selection process as a decision problem, where the goal is to choose a subset of data that will lead to the best model or outcome. The authors use Bayesian reasoning to determine which data points are most likely to improve the model's performance.
In the example of Bayesian PLeaSe!, the task is to select the most informative unlabeled data points to add to a supervised learning task. The authors show how to compute the expected improvement in model performance for each unlabeled data point, and then select the points that are expected to provide the greatest benefit.
The Bayesian Data Selection framework can be applied to a wide range of data selection problems, including frugal algorithm selection and building small, interpretable models that generalize well. By viewing data selection as a decision problem, the authors provide a principled way to make better use of unlabeled data and apply self-training techniques more effectively.
Critical Analysis
The Bayesian Data Selection framework is a promising approach to the important problem of data selection, but it is not without its limitations. The authors acknowledge that the computational complexity of the Bayesian approach may be a challenge, especially for large-scale problems. Additionally, the framework relies on accurate modeling of the underlying data distribution and the relationship between data and model performance, which may be difficult to achieve in practice.
Furthermore, the paper focuses primarily on the theoretical and algorithmic aspects of Bayesian data selection, and does not provide a comprehensive evaluation of the technique's performance across a wide range of real-world tasks and datasets. It would be valuable to see more empirical evidence of the method's effectiveness and its comparative advantages over other data selection approaches.
Despite these limitations, the Bayesian Data Selection framework represents an important step forward in the field of machine learning and data analysis. By framing data selection as a decision problem and applying Bayesian reasoning, the authors have provided a principled and theoretically grounded approach to an inherently difficult challenge. As the field continues to evolve, researchers and practitioners should carefully consider the insights and techniques presented in this paper, and explore ways to build upon and refine them.
Conclusion
The Bayesian Data Selection framework offers a novel and principled approach to the problem of data selection in machine learning and data analysis. By modeling data selection as a decision problem and applying Bayesian reasoning, the authors have provided a framework for making better use of unlabeled data, building small, interpretable models, and applying self-training techniques more effectively.
While the framework has some computational and practical limitations, it represents an important contribution to the field and opens up new avenues for research and development. As machine learning continues to evolve, the insights and techniques presented in this paper will likely play a crucial role in the ongoing quest to build more efficient, interpretable, and robust models that can tackle increasingly complex real-world problems.
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
🛠️
The Bayesian Learning Rule
Mohammad Emtiyaz Khan, H{aa}vard Rue
0
0
We show that many machine-learning algorithms are specific instances of a single algorithm called the emph{Bayesian learning rule}. The rule, derived from Bayesian principles, yields a wide-range of algorithms from fields such as optimization, deep learning, and graphical models. This includes classical algorithms such as ridge regression, Newton's method, and Kalman filter, as well as modern deep-learning algorithms such as stochastic-gradient descent, RMSprop, and Dropout. The key idea in deriving such algorithms is to approximate the posterior using candidate distributions estimated by using natural gradients. Different candidate distributions result in different algorithms and further approximations to natural gradients give rise to variants of those algorithms. Our work not only unifies, generalizes, and improves existing algorithms, but also helps us design new ones.
6/11/2024
📊
Making Better Use of Unlabelled Data in Bayesian Active Learning
Freddie Bickford Smith, Adam Foster, Tom Rainforth
0
0
Fully supervised models are predominant in Bayesian active learning. We argue that their neglect of the information present in unlabelled data harms not just predictive performance but also decisions about what data to acquire. Our proposed solution is a simple framework for semi-supervised Bayesian active learning. We find it produces better-performing models than either conventional Bayesian active learning or semi-supervised learning with randomly acquired data. It is also easier to scale up than the conventional approach. As well as supporting a shift towards semi-supervised models, our findings highlight the importance of studying models and acquisition methods in conjunction.
4/29/2024
Frugal Algorithm Selection
Erdem Kuc{s}, Ozgur Akgun, Nguyen Dang, Ian Miguel
0
0
When solving decision and optimisation problems, many competing algorithms (model and solver choices) have complementary strengths. Typically, there is no single algorithm that works well for all instances of a problem. Automated algorithm selection has been shown to work very well for choosing a suitable algorithm for a given instance. However, the cost of training can be prohibitively large due to running candidate algorithms on a representative set of training instances. In this work, we explore reducing this cost by choosing a subset of the training instances on which to train. We approach this problem in three ways: using active learning to decide based on prediction uncertainty, augmenting the algorithm predictors with a timeout predictor, and collecting training data using a progressively increasing timeout. We evaluate combinations of these approaches on six datasets from ASLib and present the reduction in labelling cost achieved by each option.
5/21/2024
👀
Self-Training: A Survey
Massih-Reza Amini, Vasilii Feofanov, Loic Pauletto, Lies Hadjadj, Emilie Devijver, Yury Maximov
0
0
Semi-supervised algorithms aim to learn prediction functions from a small set of labeled observations and a large set of unlabeled observations. Because this framework is relevant in many applications, they have received a lot of interest in both academia and industry. Among the existing techniques, self-training methods have undoubtedly attracted greater attention in recent years. These models are designed to find the decision boundary on low density regions without making additional assumptions about the data distribution, and use the unsigned output score of a learned classifier, or its margin, as an indicator of confidence. The working principle of self-training algorithms is to learn a classifier iteratively by assigning pseudo-labels to the set of unlabeled training samples with a margin greater than a certain threshold. The pseudo-labeled examples are then used to enrich the labeled training data and to train a new classifier in conjunction with the labeled training set. In this paper, we present self-training methods for binary and multi-class classification; as well as their variants and two related approaches, namely consistency-based approaches and transductive learning. We examine the impact of significant self-training features on various methods, using different general and image classification benchmarks, and we discuss our ideas for future research in self-training. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first thorough and complete survey on this subject.
5/28/2024