MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393161160 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i19.30119

Quilt: Robust Data Segment Selection against Concept Drifts

2024· article· en· W4393161160 on OpenAlexaff
Minsu Kim, Seong-Hyeon Hwang, Steven Euijong Whang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Stream Mining Techniques
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersInstitute for Information and Communications Technology PromotionMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaNational Research FoundationNational Research Foundation of KoreaSK Hynix
KeywordsQuiltSelection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continuous machine learning pipelines are common in industrial settings where models are periodically trained on data streams. Unfortunately, concept drifts may occur in data streams where the joint distribution of the data X and label y, P(X, y), changes over time and possibly degrade model accuracy. Existing concept drift adaptation approaches mostly focus on updating the model to the new data possibly using ensemble techniques of previous models and tend to discard the drifted historical data. However, we contend that explicitly utilizing the drifted data together leads to much better model accuracy and propose Quilt, a data-centric framework for identifying and selecting data segments that maximize model accuracy. To address the potential downside of efficiency, Quilt extends existing data subset selection techniques, which can be used to reduce the training data without compromising model accuracy. These techniques cannot be used as is because they only assume virtual drifts where the posterior probabilities P(y|X) are assumed not to change. In contrast, a key challenge in our setup is to also discard undesirable data segments with concept drifts. Quilt thus discards drifted data segments and selects data segment subsets holistically for accurate and efficient model training. The two operations use gradient-based scores, which have little computation overhead. In our experiments, we show that Quilt outperforms state-of-the-art drift adaptation and data selection baselines on synthetic and real datasets.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicData Stream Mining TechniquesFrench-language works237,207