Prabhant Singh

Prabhant Singh, Joaquin Vanschoren

Automated Machine Learning has grown very successful in automating the time-consuming, iterative tasks of machine learning model development. However, current methods struggle when the data is imbalanced. Since many real-world datasets are naturally imbalanced, and improper handling of this issue can lead to quite useless models, this issue should be handled carefully. This paper first introduces a new benchmark to study how different AutoML methods are affected by label imbalance. Second, we propose strategies to better deal with imbalance and integrate them into an existing AutoML framework. Finally, we present a systematic study which evaluates the impact of these strategies and find that their inclusion in AutoML systems significantly increases their robustness against label imbalance.

Prabhant Singh, Pieter Gijsbers, Murat Onur Yildirim et al.

We propose an AutoML system that enables model selection on clustering problems by leveraging optimal transport-based dataset similarity. Our objective is to establish a comprehensive AutoML pipeline for clustering problems and provide recommendations for selecting the most suitable algorithms, thus opening up a new area of AutoML beyond the traditional supervised learning settings. We compare our results against multiple clustering baselines and find that it outperforms all of them, hence demonstrating the utility of similarity-based automated model selection for solving clustering applications.

Prabhant Singh, Sibylle Hess, Joaquin Vanschoren

Transferability estimation metrics are used to find a high-performing pre-trained model for a given target task without fine-tuning models and without access to the source dataset. Despite the growing interest in developing such metrics, the benchmarks used to measure their progress have gone largely unexamined. In this work, we empirically show the shortcomings of widely used benchmark setups to evaluate transferability estimation metrics. We argue that the benchmarks on which these metrics are evaluated are fundamentally flawed. We empirically demonstrate that their unrealistic model spaces and static performance hierarchies artificially inflate the perceived performance of existing metrics, to the point where simple, dataset-agnostic heuristics can outperform sophisticated methods. Our analysis reveals a critical disconnect between current evaluation protocols and the complexities of real-world model selection. To address this, we provide concrete recommendations for constructing more robust and realistic benchmarks to guide future research in a more meaningful direction.

Prabhant Singh, Sibylle Hess, Joaquin Vanschoren

Fine-tuning models that have been pre-trained on large datasets has become a cornerstone of modern machine learning workflows. With the widespread availability of online model repositories, such as Hugging Face, it is now easier than ever to fine-tune pre-trained models for specific tasks. This raises a critical question: which pre-trained model is most suitable for a given task? This problem is called transferability estimation. In this work, we introduce two novel and effective metrics for estimating the transferability of pre-trained models. Our approach is grounded in viewing transferability as a measure of how easily a pre-trained model's representations can be trained to separate target classes, providing a unique perspective on transferability estimation. We rigorously evaluate the proposed metrics against state-of-the-art alternatives across diverse problem settings, demonstrating their robustness and practical utility. Additionally, we present theoretical insights that explain our metrics' efficacy and adaptability to various scenarios. We experimentally show that our metrics increase Kendall's Tau by up to 32% compared to the state-of-the-art baselines.