BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

David Jacob Kedziora

David Jacob Kedziora contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Machine LearningArtificial Intelligence

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Automated Deep Learning: Neural Architecture Search Is Not the End

Deep learning (DL) has proven to be a highly effective approach for developing models in diverse contexts, including visual perception, speech recognition, and machine translation. However, the end-to-end process for applying DL is not trivial. It requires grappling with problem formulation and context understanding, data engineering, model development, deployment, continuous monitoring and maintenance, and so on. Moreover, each of these steps typically relies heavily on humans, in terms of both knowledge and interactions, which impedes the further advancement and democratization of DL. Consequently, in response to these issues, a new field has emerged over the last few years: automated deep learning (AutoDL). This endeavor seeks to minimize the need for human involvement and is best known for its achievements in neural architecture search (NAS), a topic that has been the focus of several surveys. That stated, NAS is not the be-all and end-all of AutoDL. Accordingly, this review adopts an overarching perspective, examining research efforts into automation across the entirety of an archetypal DL workflow. In so doing, this work also proposes a comprehensive set of ten criteria by which to assess existing work in both individual publications and broader research areas. These criteria are: novelty, solution quality, efficiency, stability, interpretability, reproducibility, engineering quality, scalability, generalizability, and eco-friendliness. Thus, ultimately, this review provides an evaluative overview of AutoDL in the early 2020s, identifying where future opportunities for progress may exist.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

AutonoML: Towards an Integrated Framework for Autonomous Machine Learning

Over the last decade, the long-running endeavour to automate high-level processes in machine learning (ML) has risen to mainstream prominence, stimulated by advances in optimisation techniques and their impact on selecting ML models/algorithms. Central to this drive is the appeal of engineering a computational system that both discovers and deploys high-performance solutions to arbitrary ML problems with minimal human interaction. Beyond this, an even loftier goal is the pursuit of autonomy, which describes the capability of the system to independently adjust an ML solution over a lifetime of changing contexts. However, these ambitions are unlikely to be achieved in a robust manner without the broader synthesis of various mechanisms and theoretical frameworks, which, at the present time, remain scattered across numerous research threads. Accordingly, this review seeks to motivate a more expansive perspective on what constitutes an automated/autonomous ML system, alongside consideration of how best to consolidate those elements. In doing so, we survey developments in the following research areas: hyperparameter optimisation, multi-component models, neural architecture search, automated feature engineering, meta-learning, multi-level ensembling, dynamic adaptation, multi-objective evaluation, resource constraints, flexible user involvement, and the principles of generalisation. We also develop a conceptual framework throughout the review, augmented by each topic, to illustrate one possible way of fusing high-level mechanisms into an autonomous ML system. Ultimately, we conclude that the notion of architectural integration deserves more discussion, without which the field of automated ML risks stifling both its technical advantages and general uptake.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

On Taking Advantage of Opportunistic Meta-knowledge to Reduce Configuration Spaces for Automated Machine Learning

The automated machine learning (AutoML) process can require searching through complex configuration spaces of not only machine learning (ML) components and their hyperparameters but also ways of composing them together, i.e. forming ML pipelines. Optimisation efficiency and the model accuracy attainable for a fixed time budget suffer if this pipeline configuration space is excessively large. A key research question is whether it is both possible and practical to preemptively avoid costly evaluations of poorly performing ML pipelines by leveraging their historical performance for various ML tasks, i.e. meta-knowledge. The previous experience comes in the form of classifier/regressor accuracy rankings derived from either (1) a substantial but non-exhaustive number of pipeline evaluations made during historical AutoML runs, i.e. 'opportunistic' meta-knowledge, or (2) comprehensive cross-validated evaluations of classifiers/regressors with default hyperparameters, i.e. 'systematic' meta-knowledge. Numerous experiments with the AutoWeka4MCPS package suggest that (1) opportunistic/systematic meta-knowledge can improve ML outcomes, typically in line with how relevant that meta-knowledge is, and (2) configuration-space culling is optimal when it is neither too conservative nor too radical. However, the utility and impact of meta-knowledge depend critically on numerous facets of its generation and exploitation, warranting extensive analysis; these are often overlooked/underappreciated within AutoML and meta-learning literature. In particular, we observe strong sensitivity to the `challenge' of a dataset, i.e. whether specificity in choosing a predictor leads to significantly better performance. Ultimately, identifying `difficult' datasets, thus defined, is crucial to both generating informative meta-knowledge bases and understanding optimal search-space reduction strategies.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

The Roles and Modes of Human Interactions with Automated Machine Learning Systems

As automated machine learning (AutoML) systems continue to progress in both sophistication and performance, it becomes important to understand the `how' and `why' of human-computer interaction (HCI) within these frameworks, both current and expected. Such a discussion is necessary for optimal system design, leveraging advanced data-processing capabilities to support decision-making involving humans, but it is also key to identifying the opportunities and risks presented by ever-increasing levels of machine autonomy. Within this context, we focus on the following questions: (i) How does HCI currently look like for state-of-the-art AutoML algorithms, especially during the stages of development, deployment, and maintenance? (ii) Do the expectations of HCI within AutoML frameworks vary for different types of users and stakeholders? (iii) How can HCI be managed so that AutoML solutions acquire human trust and broad acceptance? (iv) As AutoML systems become more autonomous and capable of learning from complex open-ended environments, will the fundamental nature of HCI evolve? To consider these questions, we project existing literature in HCI into the space of AutoML; this connection has, to date, largely been unexplored. In so doing, we review topics including user-interface design, human-bias mitigation, and trust in artificial intelligence (AI). Additionally, to rigorously gauge the future of HCI, we contemplate how AutoML may manifest in effectively open-ended environments. This discussion necessarily reviews projected developmental pathways for AutoML, such as the incorporation of reasoning, although the focus remains on how and why HCI may occur in such a framework rather than on any implementational details. Ultimately, this review serves to identify key research directions aimed at better facilitating the roles and modes of human interactions with both current and future AutoML systems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access