REVIEW 2 cited by
Why resampling outperforms reweighting for correcting sampling bias with stochastic gradients
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
read the original abstract
A data set sampled from a certain population is biased if the subgroups of the population are sampled at proportions that are significantly different from their underlying proportions. Training machine learning models on biased data sets requires correction techniques to compensate for the bias. We consider two commonly-used techniques, resampling and reweighting, that rebalance the proportions of the subgroups to maintain the desired objective function. Though statistically equivalent, it has been observed that resampling outperforms reweighting when combined with stochastic gradient algorithms. By analyzing illustrative examples, we explain the reason behind this phenomenon using tools from dynamical stability and stochastic asymptotics. We also present experiments from regression, classification, and off-policy prediction to demonstrate that this is a general phenomenon. We argue that it is imperative to consider the objective function design and the optimization algorithm together while addressing the sampling bias.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Gradient-Boosted Pseudo-Weighting: Methods for Population Inference from Nonprobability samples
Gradient boosting inside a two-step propensity-score weighting framework improves population estimates from nonprobability samples when selection is nonlinear, but not uniformly over all settings.
-
CaTE Data Curation for Trustworthy AI
A synthesis of data curation practices for trustworthy AI, framed around an actionable definition of trustworthiness and a decision tree.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.