With the growing adoption of deep learning models in different real-world domains, including computational biology, it is often necessary to understand which data features are essential for the model's decision. Despite extensive recent efforts to define different feature importance metrics for deep learning models, we identified that inherent stochasticity in the design and training of deep learning models makes commonly used feature importance scores unstable. This results in varied explanations or selections of different features across different runs of the model. We demonstrate how the signal strength of features and correlation among features directly contribute to this instability. To address this instability, we explore the ensembling of feature importance scores of models across different epochs and find that this simple approach can substantially address this issue. For example, we consider knockoff inference as they allow feature selection with statistical guarantees. We discover considerable variability in selected features in different epochs of deep learning training, and the best selection of features doesn't necessarily occur at the lowest validation loss, the conventional approach to determine the best model. As such, we present a framework to combine the feature importance of trained models across different hyperparameter settings and epochs, and instead of selecting features from one best model, we perform an ensemble of feature importance scores from numerous good models. Across the range of experiments in simulated and various real-world datasets, we demonstrate that the proposed framework consistently improves the power of feature selection.
Shapley value is a popular approach for measuring the influence of individual features. While Shapley feature attribution is built upon desiderata from game theory, some of its constraints may be less natural in certain machine learning settings, leading to unintuitive model interpretation. In particular, the Shapley value uses the same weight for all marginal contributions -- i.e. it gives the same importance when a large number of other features are given versus when a small number of other features are given. This property can be problematic if larger feature sets are more or less informative than smaller feature sets. Our work performs a rigorous analysis of the potential limitations of Shapley feature attribution. We identify simple settings where the Shapley value is mathematically suboptimal by assigning larger attributions for less influential features. Motivated by this observation, we propose WeightedSHAP, which generalizes the Shapley value and learns which marginal contributions to focus directly from data. On several real-world datasets, we demonstrate that the influential features identified by WeightedSHAP are better able to recapitulate the model's predictions compared to the features identified by the Shapley value.
Commercial ML APIs offered by providers such as Google, Amazon and Microsoft have dramatically simplified ML adoption in many applications. Numerous companies and academics pay to use ML APIs for tasks such as object detection, OCR and sentiment analysis. Different ML APIs tackling the same task can have very heterogeneous performance. Moreover, the ML models underlying the APIs also evolve over time. As ML APIs rapidly become a valuable marketplace and a widespread way to consume machine learning, it is critical to systematically study and compare different APIs with each other and to characterize how APIs change over time. However, this topic is currently underexplored due to the lack of data. In this paper, we present HAPI (History of APIs), a longitudinal dataset of 1,761,417 instances of commercial ML API applications (involving APIs from Amazon, Google, IBM, Microsoft and other providers) across diverse tasks including image tagging, speech recognition and text mining from 2020 to 2022. Each instance consists of a query input for an API (e.g., an image or text) along with the API's output prediction/annotation and confidence scores. HAPI is the first large-scale dataset of ML API usages and is a unique resource for studying ML-as-a-service (MLaaS). As examples of the types of analyses that HAPI enables, we show that ML APIs' performance change substantially over time--several APIs' accuracies dropped on specific benchmark datasets. Even when the API's aggregate performance stays steady, its error modes can shift across different subtypes of data between 2020 and 2022. Such changes can substantially impact the entire analytics pipelines that use some ML API as a component. We further use HAPI to study commercial APIs' performance disparities across demographic subgroups over time. HAPI can stimulate more research in the growing field of MLaaS.
Deployed machine learning (ML) models often encounter new user data that differs from their training data. Therefore, estimating how well a given model might perform on the new data is an important step toward reliable ML applications. This is very challenging, however, as the data distribution can change in flexible ways, and we may not have any labels on the new data, which is often the case in monitoring settings. In this paper, we propose a new distribution shift model, Sparse Joint Shift (SJS), which considers the joint shift of both labels and a few features. This unifies and generalizes several existing shift models including label shift and sparse covariate shift, where only marginal feature or label distribution shifts are considered. We describe mathematical conditions under which SJS is identifiable. We further propose SEES, an algorithmic framework to characterize the distribution shift under SJS and to estimate a model's performance on new data without any labels. We conduct extensive experiments on several real-world datasets with various ML models. Across different datasets and distribution shifts, SEES achieves significant (up to an order of magnitude) shift estimation error improvements over existing approaches.
Telemedicine utilization was accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic, and skin conditions were a common use case. However, the quality of photographs sent by patients remains a major limitation. To address this issue, we developed TrueImage 2.0, an artificial intelligence (AI) model for assessing patient photo quality for telemedicine and providing real-time feedback to patients for photo quality improvement. TrueImage 2.0 was trained on 1700 telemedicine images annotated by clinicians for photo quality. On a retrospective dataset of 357 telemedicine images, TrueImage 2.0 effectively identified poor quality images (Receiver operator curve area under the curve (ROC-AUC) =0.78) and the reason for poor quality (Blurry ROC-AUC=0.84, Lighting issues ROC-AUC=0.70). The performance is consistent across age, gender, and skin tone. Next, we assessed whether patient-TrueImage 2.0 interaction led to an improvement in submitted photo quality through a prospective clinical pilot study with 98 patients. TrueImage 2.0 reduced the number of patients with a poor-quality image by 68.0%.
Machine learning (ML) research has generally focused on models, while the most prominent datasets have been employed for everyday ML tasks without regard for the breadth, difficulty, and faithfulness of these datasets to the underlying problem. Neglecting the fundamental importance of datasets has caused major problems involving data cascades in real-world applications and saturation of dataset-driven criteria for model quality, hindering research growth. To solve this problem, we present DataPerf, a benchmark package for evaluating ML datasets and dataset-working algorithms. We intend it to enable the "data ratchet," in which training sets will aid in evaluating test sets on the same problems, and vice versa. Such a feedback-driven strategy will generate a virtuous loop that will accelerate development of data-centric AI. The MLCommons Association will maintain DataPerf.
Helping end users comprehend the abstract distribution shifts can greatly facilitate AI deployment. Motivated by this, we propose a novel task, dataset explanation. Given two image data sets, dataset explanation aims to automatically point out their dataset-level distribution shifts with natural language. Current techniques for monitoring distribution shifts provide inadequate information to understand datasets with the goal of improving data quality. Therefore, we introduce GSCLIP, a training-free framework to solve the dataset explanation task. In GSCLIP, we propose the selector as the first quantitative evaluation method to identify explanations that are proper to summarize dataset shifts. Furthermore, we leverage this selector to demonstrate the superiority of a generator based on language model generation. Systematic evaluation on natural data shift verifies that GSCLIP, a combined system of a hybrid generator group and an efficient selector is not only easy-to-use but also powerful for dataset explanation at scale.
Language models demonstrate both quantitative improvement and new qualitative capabilities with increasing scale. Despite their potentially transformative impact, these new capabilities are as yet poorly characterized. In order to inform future research, prepare for disruptive new model capabilities, and ameliorate socially harmful effects, it is vital that we understand the present and near-future capabilities and limitations of language models. To address this challenge, we introduce the Beyond the Imitation Game benchmark (BIG-bench). BIG-bench currently consists of 204 tasks, contributed by 442 authors across 132 institutions. Task topics are diverse, drawing problems from linguistics, childhood development, math, common-sense reasoning, biology, physics, social bias, software development, and beyond. BIG-bench focuses on tasks that are believed to be beyond the capabilities of current language models. We evaluate the behavior of OpenAI's GPT models, Google-internal dense transformer architectures, and Switch-style sparse transformers on BIG-bench, across model sizes spanning millions to hundreds of billions of parameters. In addition, a team of human expert raters performed all tasks in order to provide a strong baseline. Findings include: model performance and calibration both improve with scale, but are poor in absolute terms (and when compared with rater performance); performance is remarkably similar across model classes, though with benefits from sparsity; tasks that improve gradually and predictably commonly involve a large knowledge or memorization component, whereas tasks that exhibit "breakthrough" behavior at a critical scale often involve multiple steps or components, or brittle metrics; social bias typically increases with scale in settings with ambiguous context, but this can be improved with prompting.
Algorithmic fairness plays an important role in machine learning and imposing fairness constraints during learning is a common approach. However, many datasets are imbalanced in certain label classes (e.g. "healthy") and sensitive subgroups (e.g. "older patients"). Empirically, this imbalance leads to a lack of generalizability not only of classification, but also of fairness properties, especially in over-parameterized models. For example, fairness-aware training may ensure equalized odds (EO) on the training data, but EO is far from being satisfied on new users. In this paper, we propose a theoretically-principled, yet Flexible approach that is Imbalance-Fairness-Aware (FIFA). Specifically, FIFA encourages both classification and fairness generalization and can be flexibly combined with many existing fair learning methods with logits-based losses. While our main focus is on EO, FIFA can be directly applied to achieve equalized opportunity (EqOpt); and under certain conditions, it can also be applied to other fairness notions. We demonstrate the power of FIFA by combining it with a popular fair classification algorithm, and the resulting algorithm achieves significantly better fairness generalization on several real-world datasets.