The DOI matches its DataCite record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
DECoVaC: Design of Experiments with Controlled Variability Components
Open accessAbstract
Reproducible research in Machine Learning has seen a salutary abundance of progress lately: workflows, transparency, and statistical analysis of validation and test performance. We build on these efforts and take them further. We offer a principled experimental design methodology, based on linear mixed models, to study and separate the effects of multiple factors of variation in machine learning experiments. This approach allows to account for the effects of architecture, optimizer, hyper-parameters, intentional randomization, as well as unintended lack of determinism across reruns. We illustrate that methodology by analyzing Matching Networks, Prototypical Networks and TADAM on the miniImagenet dataset.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
Logging additional metrics like hardware information and Python package versions can help future work assess statistically significant differences in model energy requirements by accounting for controlled and random variates.
“These metrics can help future work assess statistically significant differences in model energy requirements by accounting for controlled and random variates (Boquet et al., 2019).”
From Towards the Systematic Reporting of the Energy and Carbon Footprints of Machine Learning (2020) · cites this paper as Boquet et al., 2019
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 20 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Boquet, T., Delisle, L., Kochetkov, D., Schucher, N., Atighehchian, P., Oreshkin, B., & Cornebise, J.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2019
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1909.09859
- OpenAlex
- W2973701752
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2020: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Optimal Experimental Design Methods
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Scientific Computing and Data Management
- Keywords
- experimental design, reproducible machine learning, linear mixed models, variation factors, hyperparameter effects, randomization, matching networks, prototypical networks, miniImageNet, meta-learning
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
