Paper detail

Model Assertions for Monitoring and Improving ML Models

ML models are increasingly deployed in settings with real world interactions such as vehicles, but unfortunately, these models can fail in systematic ways. To prevent errors, ML engineering teams monitor and continuously improve these models. We propose a new abstraction, model assertions, that adapts the classical use of program assertions as a way to monitor and improve ML models. Model assertions are arbitrary functions over a model's input and output that indicate when errors may be occurring, e.g., a function that triggers if an object rapidly changes its class in a video. We propose methods of using model assertions at all stages of ML system deployment, including runtime monitoring, validating labels, and continuously improving ML models. For runtime monitoring, we show that model assertions can find high confidence errors, where a model returns the wrong output with high confidence, which uncertainty-based monitoring techniques would not detect. For training, we propose two methods of using model assertions. First, we propose a bandit-based active learning algorithm that can sample from data flagged by assertions and show that it can reduce labeling costs by up to 40% over traditional uncertainty-based methods. Second, we propose an API for generating "consistency assertions" (e.g., the class change example) and weak labels for inputs where the consistency assertions fail, and show that these weak labels can improve relative model quality by up to 46%. We evaluate model assertions on four real-world tasks with video, LIDAR, and ECG data.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.