Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

ModelDiff: A Framework for Comparing Learning Algorithms

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 2211.12491 v1 pith:IITBFO2A submitted 2022-11-22 cs.LG cs.CVstat.ML

classification cs.LGcs.CVstat.ML
keywords learningmodeldiffalgorithmsmodelstrainedalgorithmcomparingdata
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

We study the problem of (learning) algorithm comparison, where the goal is to find differences between models trained with two different learning algorithms. We begin by formalizing this goal as one of finding distinguishing feature transformations, i.e., input transformations that change the predictions of models trained with one learning algorithm but not the other. We then present ModelDiff, a method that leverages the datamodels framework (Ilyas et al., 2022) to compare learning algorithms based on how they use their training data. We demonstrate ModelDiff through three case studies, comparing models trained with/without data augmentation, with/without pre-training, and with different SGD hyperparameters. Our code is available at https://github.com/MadryLab/modeldiff .

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. MAGIC: Near-Optimal Data Attribution for Deep Learning

    cs.LG 2025-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MAGIC computes the exact influence function for smooth, deterministic deep learning training runs and achieves near-perfect linear datamodeling scores on CIFAR-10, GPT-2, and Gemma-2B, far outperforming TRAK and EK-FAC.

  2. Procedural Knowledge Libraries: Towards Executable (Research) Memory

    cs.DL 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Procedural Knowledge Libraries are proposed as versioned, executable records of research processes, with a lens- and patch-based architecture for Jupyter workflows.

Pith tools