Improving Reproducibility in Machine Learning Research (A Report from the NeurIPS 2019 Reproducibility Program)
Open accessAbstract
One of the challenges in machine learning research is to ensure that presented and published results are sound and reliable. Reproducibility, that is obtaining similar results as presented in a paper or talk, using the same code and data (when available), is a necessary step to verify the reliability of research findings. Reproducibility is also an important step to promote open and accessible research, thereby allowing the scientific community to quickly integrate new findings and convert ideas to practice. Reproducibility also promotes the use of robust experimental workflows, which potentially reduce unintentional errors. In 2019, the Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) conference, the premier international conference for research in machine learning, introduced a reproducibility program, designed to improve the standards across the community for how we conduct, communicate, and evaluate machine learning research. The program contained three components: a code submission policy, a community-wide reproducibility challenge, and the inclusion of the Machine Learning Reproducibility checklist as part of the paper submission process. In this paper, we describe each of these components, how it was deployed, as well as what we were able to learn from this initiative.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Most checklists currently in use are not developed for ML-based science in general but rather for specific scientific or research communities.
“Further, most checklists currently in use are not developed for ML-based science in general but rather for specific scientific or research communities.4,38”
From Leakage and the reproducibility crisis in machine-learning-based science (2023) · cites this paper as [4]
Standards of this kind crystallise an ever growing corpus of academic literature that has explored ML data quality challenges and ways to mitigate them.
“Standards of this kind crystallise an ever growing corpus of academic literature that has explored ML data quality challenges and ways to mitigate them [25,57,64,70].”
From A Survey of Data Quality Requirements That Matter in ML Development Pipelines (2023) · cites this paper as [57]
A singular focus on immediate data users can flatten the variety of uses and data quality requirements encountered at various stages of the ML development pipeline over the longer term.
“However, this singular focus can flatten the variety of uses and data quality requirements that are encountered at various stages of the ML development pipeline over the longer-term [57,70].”
From A Survey of Data Quality Requirements That Matter in ML Development Pipelines (2023) · cites this paper as [57]
Distinguishing between different classes of users is necessary to understand the radically different backgrounds and tasks needed to keep ML data quality pipelines running smoothly.
“Distinguishing between these different classes of users is necessary if we are to understand the radically different backgrounds and tasks that are needed to keep ML data quality pipelines running smoothly [57].”
From A Survey of Data Quality Requirements That Matter in ML Development Pipelines (2023) · cites this paper as [57]
Data quality must be defined using stage-specific approaches that are sensitive to where in the ML lifecycle the data are encountered and who encounters them.
“Instead, data quality must be defined using stage-specific approaches that are sensitive to where in the ML lifecycle the data are encountered and who encounters them [25,57].”
From A Survey of Data Quality Requirements That Matter in ML Development Pipelines (2023) · cites this paper as [57]
Managing data quality in industrial use cases may require new infrastructure that ingests data and converts them into a form that is more compatible with the ML trainer.
“As a result of the above, managing data quality in industrial use cases may require new infrastructure that ingests data and converts them into a form that is more compatible with the ML trainer [57].”
From A Survey of Data Quality Requirements That Matter in ML Development Pipelines (2023) · cites this paper as [57]
Traditional data quality approaches designed for relational and static datasets may not be sufficient when dealing with large-scale decentralised ML pipelines.
“Several authors have therefore noted that traditional data quality approaches designed for relational and static datasets may not be sufficient when dealing with the kinds of large-scale decentralised ML pipelines that are increasingly being used for operational and organisation-wide decision making [25,57].”
From A Survey of Data Quality Requirements That Matter in ML Development Pipelines (2023) · cites this paper as [57]
Earlier trends of opportunistic data collection and post hoc justifications of large datasets are gradually moving towards more deliberative data collection methods, sampling techniques and minimal data architectures to deliver better performance without reducing model accuracy.
“Earlier trends of opportunistic data collection and post hoc justifications of large datasets are gradually moving towards a requirement for more deliberative data collection methods [35,36], sampling techniques [16] and minimal data architectures [57] to deliver better performance without reducing model accuracy.”
From A Survey of Data Quality Requirements That Matter in ML Development Pipelines (2023) · cites this paper as [57]
Training-serving skew can be detected in pre-defined variables using analyses proposed by Polyzotis et al. and Schelter et al.
“Polyzotis et al. [57] and Schelter et al. [65] propose analyses that can be used to detect training-serving skew in pre-defined variables.”
From A Survey of Data Quality Requirements That Matter in ML Development Pipelines (2023) · cites this paper as [57]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 20 · Cited by 232
- Authors
- Pineau, J., Vincent-Lamarre, P., Sinha, K., Larivière, V., Beygelzimer, A., d'Alché-Buc, F., Fox, E., & Larochelle, H.
- Affiliations
- Meta (United States) (US)
- Université de Montréal (CA)
- University of Washington (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2020
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2003.12206
- OpenAlex
- W3013688454
- Cited by
- 232
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 11
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Papyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Scientific Computing and Data Management
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
- Keywords
- reproducibility, machine learning research, reproducibility challenge, research reliability, open research, experimental workflow
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