Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

ASPEST: Bridging the Gap Between Active Learning and Selective Prediction

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 2304.03870 v3 pith:QEXRWMAF submitted 2023-04-07 cs.LG

classification cs.LG
keywords learningactivepredictionselectiveaspestaimshumanspredictions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

Selective prediction aims to learn a reliable model that abstains from making predictions when uncertain. These predictions can then be deferred to humans for further evaluation. As an everlasting challenge for machine learning, in many real-world scenarios, the distribution of test data is different from the training data. This results in more inaccurate predictions, and often increased dependence on humans, which can be difficult and expensive. Active learning aims to lower the overall labeling effort, and hence human dependence, by querying the most informative examples. Selective prediction and active learning have been approached from different angles, with the connection between them missing. In this work, we introduce a new learning paradigm, active selective prediction, which aims to query more informative samples from the shifted target domain while increasing accuracy and coverage. For this new paradigm, we propose a simple yet effective approach, ASPEST, that utilizes ensembles of model snapshots with self-training with their aggregated outputs as pseudo labels. Extensive experiments on numerous image, text and structured datasets, which suffer from domain shifts, demonstrate that ASPEST can significantly outperform prior work on selective prediction and active learning (e.g. on the MNIST$\to$SVHN benchmark with the labeling budget of 100, ASPEST improves the AUACC metric from 79.36% to 88.84%) and achieves more optimal utilization of humans in the loop.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. On the Limits of Selective AI Prediction: A Case Study in Clinical Decision Making

    cs.HC 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Selective prediction keeps clinicians' overall accuracy roughly intact but shifts errors toward underdiagnosis (18% more missed) and undertreatment (35% more missed) when the AI abstains.

Pith tools