Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1912.01321

Less Is Better: Unweighted Data Subsampling via Influence Function

Zifeng Wang·Hong Zhu·Zhenhua Dong·Xiuqiang He·Shao-Lun Huang
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In the time of Big Data, training complex models on large-scale data sets is challenging, making it appealing to reduce data volume for saving computation resources by subsampling. Most previous works in subsampling are weighted methods designed to help the performance of subset-model approach the full-set-model, hence the weighted methods have no chance to acquire a subset-model that is better than the full-set-model. However, we question that how can we achieve better model with less data? In this work, we propose a novel Unweighted Influence Data Subsampling (UIDS) method, and prove that the subset-model acquired through our method can outperform the full-set-model. Besides, we show that overly confident on a given test set for sampling is common in Influence-based subsampling methods, which can eventually cause our subset-model's failure in out-of-sample test. To mitigate it, we develop a probabilistic sampling scheme to control the worst-case risk over all distributions close to the empirical distribution. The experiment results demonstrate our methods superiority over existed subsampling methods in diverse tasks, such as text classification, image classification, click-through prediction, etc.

Explore related subjects

cs.LGstat.ML

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Zifeng Wang, Hong Zhu, Zhenhua Dong, Xiuqiang He, Shao-Lun Huang. 2019-12-03. Less Is Better: Unweighted Data Subsampling via Influence Function. https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.01321

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG↗