arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2005.09241cs.CVcs.LG
收藏

On the Value of Out-of-Distribution Testing: An Example of Goodhart's Law

Australian Institute for Machine Learning(澳大利亚机器学习研究所);University of Adelaide(阿德莱德大学);Adobe Research(奥多比研究部);Rochester Institute of Technology(罗切斯特理工学院)

Damien Teney, Kushal Kafle, Robik Shrestha, Ehsan Abbasnejad, Christopher Kanan, Anton van den Hengel

英文摘要:

Out-of-distribution (OOD) testing is increasingly popular for evaluating a machine learning system's ability to generalize beyond the biases of a training set. OOD benchmarks are designed to present a different joint distribution of data and labels between training and test time. VQA-CP has become the standard OOD benchmark for visual question answering, but we discovered three troubling practices in its current use. First, most published methods rely on explicit knowledge of the construction of the OOD splits. They often rely on ``inverting'' the distribution of labels, e.g. answering mostly 'yes' when the common training answer is 'no'. Second, the OOD test set is used for model selection. Third, a model's in-domain performance is assessed after retraining it on in-domain splits (VQA v2) that exhibit a more balanced distribution of labels. These three practices defeat the objective of evaluating generalization, and put into question the value of methods specifically designed for this dataset. We show that embarrassingly-simple methods, including one that generates answers at random, surpass the state of the art on some question types. We provide short- and long-term solutions to avoid these pitfalls and realize the benefits of OOD evaluation.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑