Machine learning research has long focused on models rather than datasets, and prominent datasets are used for common ML tasks without regard to the breadth, difficulty, and faithfulness of the underlying problems. Neglecting the fundamental importance of data has given rise to inaccuracy, bias, and fragility in real-world applications, and research is hindered by saturation across existing dataset benchmarks. In response, we present DataPerf, a community-led benchmark suite for evaluating ML datasets and data-centric algorithms. We aim to foster innovation in data-centric AI through competition, comparability, and reproducibility. We enable the ML community to iterate on datasets, instead of just architectures, and we provide an open, online platform with multiple rounds of challenges to support this iterative development. The first iteration of DataPerf contains five benchmarks covering a wide spectrum of data-centric techniques, tasks, and modalities in vision, speech, acquisition, debugging, and diffusion prompting, and we support hosting new contributed benchmarks from the community. The benchmarks, online evaluation platform, and baseline implementations are open source, and the MLCommons Association will maintain DataPerf to ensure long-term benefits to academia and industry.

Real-world deployment of machine learning models is challenging because data evolves over time. While no model can work when data evolves in an arbitrary fashion, if there is some pattern to these changes, we might be able to design methods to address it. This paper addresses situations when data evolves gradually. We introduce a time-varying propensity score that can detect gradual shifts in the distribution of data which allows us to selectively sample past data to update the model -- not just similar data from the past like that of a standard propensity score but also data that evolved in a similar fashion in the past. The time-varying propensity score is quite general: we demonstrate different ways of implementing it and evaluate it on a variety of problems ranging from supervised learning (e.g., image classification problems) where data undergoes a sequence of gradual shifts, to reinforcement learning tasks (e.g., robotic manipulation and continuous control) where data shifts as the policy or the task changes.

We introduce BSDetector, a method for detecting bad and speculative answers from a pretrained Large Language Model by estimating a numeric confidence score for any output it generated. Our uncertainty quantification technique works for any LLM accessible only via a black-box API, whose training data remains unknown. By expending a bit of extra computation, users of any LLM API can now get the same response as they would ordinarily, as well as a confidence estimate that cautions when not to trust this response. Experiments on both closed and open-form Question-Answer benchmarks reveal that BSDetector more accurately identifies incorrect LLM responses than alternative uncertainty estimation procedures (for both GPT-3 and ChatGPT). By sampling multiple responses from the LLM and considering the one with the highest confidence score, we can additionally obtain more accurate responses from the same LLM, without any extra training steps. In applications involving automated evaluation with LLMs, accounting for our confidence scores leads to more reliable evaluation in both human-in-the-loop and fully-automated settings (across both GPT 3.5 and 4).

Such Swapped errors are also common vehicles, object detection remains fairly in many classification datasets (Northcutt et al., 2021a), brittle in part due to annotation errors that plague but the increased complexity of object detection annotation most real-world training datasets. We propose introduces potential for more varied types of label errors ObjectLab, a straightforward algorithm to detect than encountered in classification. We propose an algorithm, diverse errors in object detection labels, including: ObjectLab, that utilizes any trained object detection model overlooked bounding boxes, badly located boxes, to estimate the incorrect labels in such a dataset, regardless and incorrect class label assignments. Object-which of these 3 types of mistake the data annotators made. Lab utilizes any trained object detection model to score the label quality of each image, such that Training and evaluating models with incorrect bounding box mislabeled images can be automatically prioritized annotations is clearly worrisome.

The labor-intensive annotation process of semantic segmentation datasets is often prone to errors, since humans struggle to label every pixel correctly. We study algorithms to automatically detect such annotation errors, in particular methods to score label quality, such that the images with the lowest scores are least likely to be correctly labeled. This helps prioritize what data to review in order to ensure a high-quality training/evaluation dataset, which is critical in sensitive applications such as medical imaging and autonomous vehicles. Widely applicable, our label quality scores rely on probabilistic predictions from a trained segmentation model -- any model architecture and training procedure can be utilized. Here we study 7 different label quality scoring methods used in conjunction with a DeepLabV3+ or a FPN segmentation model to detect annotation errors in a version of the SYNTHIA dataset. Precision-recall evaluations reveal a score -- the soft-minimum of the model-estimated likelihoods of each pixel's annotated class -- that is particularly effective to identify images that are mislabeled, across multiple types of annotation error.

Noise plagues many numerical datasets, where the recorded values in the data may fail to match the true underlying values due to reasons including: erroneous sensors, data entry/processing mistakes, or imperfect human estimates. Here we consider estimating which data values are incorrect along a numerical column. We present a model-agnostic approach that can utilize any regressor (i.e. statistical or machine learning model) which was fit to predict values in this column based on the other variables in the dataset. By accounting for various uncertainties, our approach distinguishes between genuine anomalies and natural data fluctuations, conditioned on the available information in the dataset. We establish theoretical guarantees for our method and show that other approaches like conformal inference struggle to detect errors. We also contribute a new error detection benchmark involving 5 regression datasets with real-world numerical errors (for which the true values are also known). In this benchmark and additional simulation studies, our method identifies incorrect values with better precision/recall than other approaches.

We present a straightforward statistical test to detect certain violations of the assumption that the data are Independent and Identically Distributed (IID). The specific form of violation considered is common across real-world applications: whether the examples are ordered in the dataset such that almost adjacent examples tend to have more similar feature values (e.g. due to distributional drift, or attractive interactions between datapoints). Based on a k-Nearest Neighbors estimate, our approach can be used to audit any multivariate numeric data as well as other data types (image, text, audio, etc.) that can be numerically represented, perhaps with model embeddings. Compared with existing methods to detect drift or auto-correlation, our approach is both applicable to more types of data and also able to detect a wider variety of IID violations in practice. Code: https://github.com/cleanlab/cleanlab

Continual learning (CL) enables the development of models and agents that learn from a sequence of tasks while addressing the limitations of standard deep learning approaches, such as catastrophic forgetting. In this work, we investigate the factors that contribute to the performance differences between task-agnostic CL and multi-task (MTL) agents. We pose two hypotheses: (1) task-agnostic methods might provide advantages in settings with limited data, computation, or high dimensionality, and (2) faster adaptation may be particularly beneficial in continual learning settings, helping to mitigate the effects of catastrophic forgetting. To investigate these hypotheses, we introduce a replay-based recurrent reinforcement learning (3RL) methodology for task-agnostic CL agents. We assess 3RL on a synthetic task and the Meta-World benchmark, which includes 50 unique manipulation tasks. Our results demonstrate that 3RL outperforms baseline methods and can even surpass its multi-task equivalent in challenging settings with high dimensionality. We also show that the recurrent task-agnostic agent consistently outperforms or matches the performance of its transformer-based counterpart. These findings provide insights into the advantages of task-agnostic CL over task-aware MTL approaches and highlight the potential of task-agnostic methods in resource-constrained, high-dimensional, and multi-task environments.

Real-world data for classification is often labeled by multiple annotators. For analyzing such data, we introduce CROWDLAB, a straightforward approach to utilize any trained classifier to estimate: (1) A consensus label for each example that aggregates the available annotations; (2) A confidence score for how likely each consensus label is correct; (3) A rating for each annotator quantifying the overall correctness of their labels. Existing algorithms to estimate related quantities in crowdsourcing often rely on sophisticated generative models with iterative inference. CROWDLAB instead uses a straightforward weighted ensemble. Existing algorithms often rely solely on annotator statistics, ignoring the features of the examples from which the annotations derive. CROWDLAB utilizes any classifier model trained on these features, and can thus better generalize between examples with similar features. On real-world multi-annotator image data, our proposed method provides superior estimates for (1)-(3) than existing algorithms like Dawid-Skene/GLAD.

A often provide imperfect labels. It is thus common very general approach, ActiveLab can be used: with any to employ multiple annotators to label data type of classifier model (or ensemble of multiple models) with some overlap between their examples. We and data modality, for active learning with multiple annotators study active learning in such settings, aiming to where the set of annotators changes over time, for train an accurate classifier by collecting a dataset traditional active learning where each example is labeled with the fewest total annotations. Here we propose at most once (Appendix D), and for active label cleaning ActiveLab, a practical method to decide what where all data is already labeled by at least one annotator to label next that works with any classifier model and the goal is to establish the highest quality consensus and can be used in pool-based batch active learning labels within a limited annotation budget. ActiveLab is with one or multiple annotators.