NOCTA: Non-Greedy Objective Cost-Tradeoff Acquisition for Longitudinal Data

In many critical applications, resource constraints limit the amount of information that can be gathered to make predictions. For example, in healthcare, patient data often spans diverse features ranging from lab tests to imaging studies. Each feature may carry different information and must be acquired at a respective cost of time, money, or risk to the patient. Moreover, temporal prediction tasks, where both instance features and labels evolve over time, introduce additional complexity in deciding when or what information is important. In this work, we propose NOCTA, a Non-Greedy Objective Cost-Tradeoff Acquisition method that sequentially acquires the most informative features at inference time while accounting for both temporal dynamics and acquisition cost. We first introduce a cohesive estimation target for our NOCTA setting, and then develop two complementary estimators: 1) a non-parametric method based on nearest neighbors to guide the acquisition (NOCTA-NP), and 2) a parametric method that directly predicts the utility of potential acquisitions (NOCTA-P). Experiments on synthetic and real-world medical datasets demonstrate that both NOCTA variants outperform existing baselines.

The Grand Illusion: The Myth of Software Portability and Implications for ML Progress

Pushing the boundaries of machine learning often requires exploring different hardware and software combinations. However, the freedom to experiment across different tooling stacks can be at odds with the drive for efficiency, which has produced increasingly specialized AI hardware and incentivized consolidation around a narrow set of ML frameworks. Exploratory research can be restricted if software and hardware are co-evolving, making it even harder to stray away from mainstream ideas that work well with popular tooling stacks. While this friction increasingly impacts the rate of innovation in machine learning, to our knowledge the lack of portability in tooling has not been quantified. In this work, we ask: How portable are popular ML software frameworks? We conduct a large-scale study of the portability of mainstream ML frameworks across different hardware types. Our findings paint an uncomfortable picture -- frameworks can lose more than 40% of their key functions when ported to other hardware. Worse, even when functions are portable, the slowdown in their performance can be extreme and render performance untenable. Collectively, our results reveal how costly straying from a narrow set of hardware-software combinations can be - and suggest that specialization of hardware impedes innovation in machine learning research.