REVIEW 1 cited by
How Developers Iterate on Machine Learning Workflows -- A Survey of the Applied Machine Learning Literature
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Machine learning workflow development is anecdotally regarded to be an iterative process of trial-and-error with humans-in-the-loop. However, we are not aware of quantitative evidence corroborating this popular belief. A quantitative characterization of iteration can serve as a benchmark for machine learning workflow development in practice, and can aid the development of human-in-the-loop machine learning systems. To this end, we conduct a small-scale survey of the applied machine learning literature from five distinct application domains. We collect and distill statistics on the role of iteration within machine learning workflow development, and report preliminary trends and insights from our investigation, as a starting point towards this benchmark. Based on our findings, we finally describe desiderata for effective and versatile human-in-the-loop machine learning systems that can cater to users in diverse domains.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
FaaS and Furious: abstractions and differential caching for efficient data pre-processing
A columnar differential cache for lakehouse pipelines reuses overlapping scan fragments and reduces S3 bytes read by up to 30% in preliminary benchmarks.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.