Cited by 110Machine Learning and Data ClassificationSoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesScientific Computing and Data Management

Whither AutoML? Understanding the Role of Automation in Machine Learning Workflows

Open access
Xin, Doris, Wu, Eva Yiwei, Lee, Doris Jung-Lin, Salehi, Niloufar, Parameswaran, Aditya·2021·Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Abstract

Efforts to make machine learning more widely accessible have led to a rapid increase in Auto-ML tools that aim to automate the process of training and deploying machine learning. To understand how Auto-ML tools are used in practice today, we performed a qualitative study with participants ranging from novice hobbyists to industry researchers who use Auto-ML tools. We present insights into the benefits and deficiencies of existing tools, as well as the respective roles of the human and automation in ML workflows. Finally, we discuss design implications for the future of Auto-ML tool development. We argue that instead of full automation being the ultimate goal of Auto-ML, designers of these tools should focus on supporting a partnership between the user and the Auto-ML tool. This means that a range of Auto-ML tools will need to be developed to support varying user goals such as simplicity, reproducibility, and reliability.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3411764.3445306

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Commercial AutoML offerings can be categorised broadly into two groups: those offered by major cloud providers and those offered by dedicated AutoML organisations.

    “The commercial Au-toML oferings can be categorised broadly into two groups: those ofered by major cloud providers (e.g., Google, Microsoft), and those ofered by dedicated AutoML organisations (often startups, e.g., DataRobot, H2O.ai, 4Paradigm) [157].”
  • In one of the few studies exploring practitioner experiences using AutoML tools and platforms, Xin et al. demonstrated a dissonance between those building AutoML tooling seeking to achieve 'full automation' and that of actual users for whom 'a complete automation is neither a requirement nor a desired outcome'.

    “Similarly, in one of the few studies exploring practitioner experiences using AutoML tools and platforms, Xin et al. demonstrated a dissonance between those building AutoML tooling seeking to achieve”
  • Users expressed interest in a more 'human-in-the-loop' AutoML that aims to empower users in undertaking ML development, rather than replace them completely.

    “Instead, they found that users expressed interest in a more”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Shoumik Palkar, James J Thomas, Anil Shanbhag, Deepak Narayanan, Holger Pirk, Malte Schwarzkopf, Saman Amarasinghe, Matei Zaharia, and Stanford InfoLab. 2017. Weld: A common runtime for high performance data analytics. In Conference on Innovative Data Systems Research (CIDR). CIDR, Chaminade, California, 45.
  2. Daniel Karl I. Weidele, Justin D. Weisz, Eno Oduor, Michael Muller, Josh An- dres, Alexander Gray, and Dakuo Wang. 2019. AutoAIViz: Opening the Black- box of Automated Artificial Intelligence with Conditional Parallel Coordinates. arXiv:cs.LG/1912.06723
  3. Doris Xin, Stephen Macke, Litian Ma, Jialin Liu, Shuchen Song, and Aditya Parameswaran. 2018. Helix: holistic optimization for accelerating iterative ma- chine learning. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 12, 4 (2018), 446-460.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xin, D., Wu, E. Y., Lee, D. J.-L., Salehi, N., & Parameswaran, A.
Affiliations
University of California, Berkeley (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2021-05-06
Pages
1-16
OpenAlex
W3160033795
Cited by
110
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 7
FWCI
8.70
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
National Science Foundation (IIS-1940759, IIS-1940757)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Scientific Computing and Data Management
Keywords
automated machine learning, machine learning automation, machine learning workflow, reproducibility, reliability

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review