MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321448342 · doi:10.14778/3574245.3574273

On Efficient Approximate Queries over Machine Learning Models

2022· article· en· W4321448342 on OpenAlexaff
Dujian Ding, Sihem Amer-Yahia, Laks V. S. Lakshmanan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsOracleComputer scienceHeuristicQuality (philosophy)Random oracleMachine learningArtificial intelligenceData miningTheoretical computer scienceInformation retrievalProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The question of answering queries over ML predictions has been gaining attention in the database community. This question is challenging because finding high quality answers by invoking an oracle such as a human expert or an expensive deep neural network model on every single item in the DB and then applying the query, can be prohibitive. We develop a novel unified framework for approximate query answering by leveraging a proxy to minimize the oracle usage of finding high quality answers for both Precision-Target (PT) and Recall-Target (RT) queries. Our framework uses a judicious combination of invoking the expensive oracle on data samples and applying the cheap proxy on the DB objects. It relies on two assumptions. Under the P roxy Q uality assumption, we develop two algorithms: PQA that efficiently finds high quality answers with high probability and no oracle calls, and PQE, a heuristic extension that achieves empirically good performance with a small number of oracle calls. Alternatively, under the C ore S et C losure assumption, we develop two algorithms: CSC that efficiently returns high quality answers with high probability and minimal oracle usage, and CSE, which extends it to more general settings. Our extensive experiments on five real-world datasets on both query types, PT and RT, demonstrate that our algorithms outperform the state-of-the-art and achieve high result quality with provable statistical guarantees.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.014
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicMachine Learning and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207