Active learning allows machine learning models to be trained using fewer labels while retaining similar performance to traditional supervised learning. An active learner selects the most informative data points, requests their labels, and retrains itself. While this approach is promising, it raises the question of how to determine when the model is `good enough' without the additional labels required for traditional evaluation. Previously, different stopping criteria have been proposed aiming to identify the optimal stopping point. Yet, optimality can only be expressed as a domain-dependent trade-off between accuracy and the number of labels, and no criterion is superior in all applications. As a further complication, a comparison of criteria for a particular real-world application would require practitioners to collect additional labelled data they are aiming to avoid by using active learning in the first place. This work enables practitioners to employ active learning by providing actionable recommendations for which stopping criteria are best for a given real-world scenario. We contribute the first large-scale comparison of stopping criteria for pool-based active learning, using a cost measure to quantify the accuracy/label trade-off, public implementations of all stopping criteria we evaluate, and an open-source framework for evaluating stopping criteria. Our research enables practitioners to substantially reduce labelling costs by utilizing the stopping criterion which best suits their domain.

When using active learning, smaller batch sizes are typically more efficient from a learning efficiency perspective. However, in practice due to speed and human annotator considerations, the use of larger batch sizes is necessary. While past work has shown that larger batch sizes decrease learning efficiency from a learning curve perspective, it remains an open question how batch size impacts methods for stopping active learning. We find that large batch sizes degrade the performance of a leading stopping method over and above the degradation that results from reduced learning efficiency. We analyze this degradation and find that it can be mitigated by changing the window size parameter of how many past iterations of learning are taken into account when making the stopping decision. We find that when using larger batch sizes, stopping methods are more effective when smaller window sizes are used.

A survey of existing methods for stopping active learning (AL) reveals the needs for methods that are: more widely applicable; more aggressive in saving annotations; and more stable across changing datasets. A new method for stopping AL based on stabilizing predictions is presented that addresses these needs. Furthermore, stopping methods are required to handle a broad range of different annotation/performance tradeoff valuations. Despite this, the existing body of work is dominated by conservative methods with little (if any) attention paid to providing users with control over the behavior of stopping methods. The proposed method is shown to fill a gap in the level of aggressiveness available for stopping AL and supports providing users with control over stopping behavior.