Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Oops, I Sampled it Again: Reinterpreting Confidence Intervals in Few-Shot Learning

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2409.02850 v2 pith:2FZTZ5AD submitted 2024-09-04 cs.LG cs.AIstat.ML

classification cs.LGcs.AIstat.ML
keywords confidenceintervalstaskscomparativefew-shotlearningmethodpredominant
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The predominant method for computing confidence intervals (CI) in few-shot learning (FSL) is based on sampling the tasks with replacement, i.e.\ allowing the same samples to appear in multiple tasks. This makes the CI misleading in that it takes into account the randomness of the sampler but not the data itself. To quantify the extent of this problem, we conduct a comparative analysis between CIs computed with and without replacement. These reveal a notable underestimation by the predominant method. This observation calls for a reevaluation of how we interpret confidence intervals and the resulting conclusions in FSL comparative studies. Our research demonstrates that the use of paired tests can partially address this issue. Additionally, we explore methods to further reduce the (size of the) CI by strategically sampling tasks of a specific size. We also introduce a new optimized benchmark, which can be accessed at https://github.com/RafLaf/FSL-benchmark-again

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Pith tools