Much recent work on visual recognition aims to scale up learning to massive, noisily-annotated datasets. We address the problem of scaling- up the evaluation of such models to large-scale datasets with noisy labels. Current protocols for doing so require a human user to either vet (re-annotate) a small fraction of the test set and ignore the rest, or else correct errors in annotation as they are found through manual inspection of results. In this work, we re-formulate the problem as one of active testing, and examine strategies for efficiently querying a user so as to obtain an accu- rate performance estimate with minimal vetting. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed active testing framework on estimating two performance metrics, Precision@K and mean Average Precision, for two popular computer vision tasks, multi-label classification and instance segmentation. We further show that our approach is able to save significant human annotation effort and is more robust than alternative evaluation protocols.
The problem of estimating benchmark performance from sampled relevance labels has been explored more extensively in the information retrieval literature where complete annotation was acknowledged as infeasible. Initial work focused on deriving labeling strategies that produce low-variance and unbiased estimates @cite_29 @cite_43 and identifying performant retrieval systems @cite_22 . @cite_5 give error bounds for estimating PR and ROC curves by choosing samples to label based on the system output ranking. @cite_45 estimate performance using an EM algorithm to integrate relevance judgements. @cite_39 and @cite_4 take a strategy similar to ours in actively selecting test items to label as well as estimating performance on remaining unlabeled data.
@cite_4 @cite_22 @cite_29 @cite_39 @cite_43 @cite_45 @cite_5
2009954908 2069870183 94418491 2950552877
We consider the problem of large-scale retrieval evaluation, and we propose a statistical method for evaluating retrieval systems using incomplete judgments. Unlike existing techniques that (1) rely on effectively complete, and thus prohibitively expensive, relevance judgment sets, (2) produce biased estimates of standard performance measures, or (3) produce estimates of non-standard measures thought to be correlated with these standard measures, our proposed statistical technique produces unbiased estimates of the standard measures themselves.Our proposed technique is based on random sampling. While our estimates are unbiased by statistical design, their variance is dependent on the sampling distribution employed; as such, we derive a sampling distribution likely to yield low variance estimates. We test our proposed technique using benchmark TREC data, demonstrating that a sampling pool derived from a set of runs can be used to efficiently and effectively evaluate those runs. We further show that these sampling pools generalize well to unseen runs. Our experiments indicate that highly accurate estimates of standard performance measures can be obtained using a number of relevance judgments as small as 4 of the typical TREC-style judgment pool. Modern large retrieval environments tend to overwhelm their users by their large output. Since all documents are not of equal relevance to their users, highly relevant documents should be identified and ranked first for presentation. In order to develop IR techniques in this direction, it is necessary to develop evaluation approaches and methods that credit IR methods for their ability to retrieve highly relevant documents. This can be done by extending traditional evaluation methods, that is, recall and precision based on binary relevance judgments, to graded relevance judgments. Alternatively, novel measures based on graded relevance judgments may be developed. This article proposes several novel measures that compute the cumulative gain the user obtains by examining the retrieval result up to a given ranked position. The first one accumulates the relevance scores of retrieved documents along the ranked result list. The second one is similar but applies a discount factor to the relevance scores in order to devaluate late-retrieved documents. The third one computes the relative-to-the-ideal performance of IR techniques, based on the cumulative gain they are able to yield. These novel measures are defined and discussed and their use is demonstrated in a case study using TREC data: sample system run results for 20 queries in TREC-7. As a relevance base we used novel graded relevance judgments on a four-point scale. The test results indicate that the proposed measures credit IR methods for their ability to retrieve highly relevant documents and allow testing of statistical significance of effectiveness differences. The graphs based on the measures also provide insight into the performance IR techniques and allow interpretation, for example, from the user point of view. Mining data with minimal annotation costs requires efficient active approaches, that ideally select the optimal candidate for labelling under a user-specified classification performance measure. Common generic approaches, that are usable with any classifier and any performance measure, are either slow like error reduction, or heuristics like uncertainty sampling. In contrast, our Probabilistic Active Learning (PAL) approach offers versatility, direct optimisation of a performance measure and computational efficiency. Given a labelling candidate from a pool, PAL models both the candidate’s label and the true posterior in its neighbourhood as random variables. By computing the expectation of the gain in classification performance over both random variables, PAL then selects the candidate that in expectation will improve the classification performance the most. Extending our recent poster, we discuss the properties of PAL and perform a thorough experimental evaluation on several synthetic and real-world data sets of different sizes. Results show comparable or better classification performance than error reduction and uncertainty sampling, yet PAL has the same asymptotic time complexity as uncertainty sampling and is faster than error reduction. This paper studies the problem of inferring a global preference based on the partial rankings provided by many users over different subsets of items according to the Plackett-Luce model. A question of particular interest is how to optimally assign items to users for ranking and how many item assignments are needed to achieve a target estimation error. For a given assignment of items to users, we first derive an oracle lower bound of the estimation error that holds even for the more general Thurstone models. Then we show that the Cram 'er-Rao lower bound and our upper bounds inversely depend on the spectral gap of the Laplacian of an appropriately defined comparison graph. When the system is allowed to choose the item assignment, we propose a random assignment scheme. Our oracle lower bound and upper bounds imply that it is minimax-optimal up to a logarithmic factor among all assignment schemes and the lower bound can be achieved by the maximum likelihood estimator as well as popular rank-breaking schemes that decompose partial rankings into pairwise comparisons. The numerical experiments corroborate our theoretical findings.