Limitations of Assessing Active Learning Performance at Runtime
This addresses a critical issue for practitioners using active learning in real-world applications where labeling is expensive, but it is an incremental analysis rather than a novel solution.
The paper tackles the problem of assessing active learning performance during deployment when ground truth is unavailable, finding that existing strategies fail to reliably estimate performance, highlighting a major challenge for future research.
Classification algorithms aim to predict an unknown label (e.g., a quality class) for a new instance (e.g., a product). Therefore, training samples (instances and labels) are used to deduct classification hypotheses. Often, it is relatively easy to capture instances but the acquisition of the corresponding labels remain difficult or expensive. Active learning algorithms select the most beneficial instances to be labeled to reduce cost. In research, this labeling procedure is simulated and therefore a ground truth is available. But during deployment, active learning is a one-shot problem and an evaluation set is not available. Hence, it is not possible to reliably estimate the performance of the classification system during learning and it is difficult to decide when the system fulfills the quality requirements (stopping criteria). In this article, we formalize the task and review existing strategies to assess the performance of an actively trained classifier during training. Furthermore, we identified three major challenges: 1)~to derive a performance distribution, 2)~to preserve representativeness of the labeled subset, and 3) to correct against sampling bias induced by an intelligent selection strategy. In a qualitative analysis, we evaluate different existing approaches and show that none of them reliably estimates active learning performance stating a major challenge for future research for such systems. All plots and experiments are provided in a Jupyter notebook that is available for download.