4.6LGJul 10, 2024
Automating Weak Label Generation for Data Programming with Clinicians in the LoopJean Park, Sydney Pugh, Kaustubh Sridhar et al.
Large Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) are often data hungry and need high-quality labeled data in copious amounts for learning to converge. This is a challenge in the field of medicine since high quality labeled data is often scarce. Data programming has been the ray of hope in this regard, since it allows us to label unlabeled data using multiple weak labeling functions. Such functions are often supplied by a domain expert. Data-programming can combine multiple weak labeling functions and suggest labels better than simple majority voting over the different functions. However, it is not straightforward to express such weak labeling functions, especially in high-dimensional settings such as images and time-series data. What we propose in this paper is a way to bypass this issue, using distance functions. In high-dimensional spaces, it is easier to find meaningful distance metrics which can generalize across different labeling tasks. We propose an algorithm that queries an expert for labels of a few representative samples of the dataset. These samples are carefully chosen by the algorithm to capture the distribution of the dataset. The labels assigned by the expert on the representative subset induce a labeling on the full dataset, thereby generating weak labels to be used in the data programming pipeline. In our medical time series case study, labeling a subset of 50 to 130 out of 3,265 samples showed 17-28% improvement in accuracy and 13-28% improvement in F1 over the baseline using clinician-defined labeling functions. In our medical image case study, labeling a subset of about 50 to 120 images from 6,293 unlabeled medical images using our approach showed significant improvement over the baseline method, Snuba, with an increase of approximately 5-15% in accuracy and 12-19% in F1 score.
8.4LGAug 13, 2021
Detecting OODs as datapoints with High UncertaintyRamneet Kaur, Susmit Jha, Anirban Roy et al.
Deep neural networks (DNNs) are known to produce incorrect predictions with very high confidence on out-of-distribution inputs (OODs). This limitation is one of the key challenges in the adoption of DNNs in high-assurance systems such as autonomous driving, air traffic management, and medical diagnosis. This challenge has received significant attention recently, and several techniques have been developed to detect inputs where the model's prediction cannot be trusted. These techniques detect OODs as datapoints with either high epistemic uncertainty or high aleatoric uncertainty. We demonstrate the difference in the detection ability of these techniques and propose an ensemble approach for detection of OODs as datapoints with high uncertainty (epistemic or aleatoric). We perform experiments on vision datasets with multiple DNN architectures, achieving state-of-the-art results in most cases.
11.9LGMar 23, 2021
Are all outliers alike? On Understanding the Diversity of Outliers for Detecting OODsRamneet Kaur, Susmit Jha, Anirban Roy et al.
Deep neural networks (DNNs) are known to produce incorrect predictions with very high confidence on out-of-distribution (OOD) inputs. This limitation is one of the key challenges in the adoption of deep learning models in high-assurance systems such as autonomous driving, air traffic management, and medical diagnosis. This challenge has received significant attention recently, and several techniques have been developed to detect inputs where the model's prediction cannot be trusted. These techniques use different statistical, geometric, or topological signatures. This paper presents a taxonomy of OOD outlier inputs based on their source and nature of uncertainty. We demonstrate how different existing detection approaches fail to detect certain types of outliers. We utilize these insights to develop a novel integrated detection approach that uses multiple attributes corresponding to different types of outliers. Our results include experiments on CIFAR10, SVHN and MNIST as in-distribution data and Imagenet, LSUN, SVHN (for CIFAR10), CIFAR10 (for SVHN), KMNIST, and F-MNIST as OOD data across different DNN architectures such as ResNet34, WideResNet, DenseNet, and LeNet5.
6.6LOJun 20, 2018
Self-Driving Vehicle Verification Towards a BenchmarkNima Roohi, Ramneet Kaur, James Weimer et al.
Industrial cyber-physical systems are hybrid systems with strict safety requirements. Despite not having a formal semantics, most of these systems are modeled using Stateflow/Simulink for mainly two reasons: (1) it is easier to model, test, and simulate using these tools, and (2) dynamics of these systems are not supported by most other tools. Furthermore, with the ever growing complexity of cyber-physical systems, grows the gap between what can be modeled using an automatic formal verification tool and models of industrial cyber-physical systems. In this paper, we present a simple formal model for self-deriving cars. While after some simplification, safety of this system has already been proven manually, to the best of our knowledge, no automatic formal verification tool supports its dynamics. We hope this serves as a challenge problem for formal verification tools targeting industrial applications.