Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 171 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 52 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 38 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 43 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 108 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 173 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 442 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.5 34 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

SURF: Improving classifiers in production by learning from busy and noisy end users (2010.05852v1)

Published 12 Oct 2020 in cs.LG

Abstract: Supervised learning classifiers inevitably make mistakes in production, perhaps mis-labeling an email, or flagging an otherwise routine transaction as fraudulent. It is vital that the end users of such a system are provided with a means of relabeling data points that they deem to have been mislabeled. The classifier can then be retrained on the relabeled data points in the hope of performance improvement. To reduce noise in this feedback data, well known algorithms from the crowdsourcing literature can be employed. However, the feedback setting provides a new challenge: how do we know what to do in the case of user non-response? If a user provides us with no feedback on a label then it can be dangerous to assume they implicitly agree: a user can be busy, lazy, or no longer a user of the system! We show that conventional crowdsourcing algorithms struggle in this user feedback setting, and present a new algorithm, SURF, that can cope with this non-response ambiguity.

Citations (496)

Summary

  • The paper presents SURF, an algorithm that leverages selective user feedback to overcome noisy and ambiguous responses.
  • SURF estimates user busyness to interpret non-responses and align them with classifier outputs, ensuring robust performance.
  • Empirical evaluation on the MNIST dataset shows that SURF maintains high accuracy even under significant user noise and busyness.

Improving Classifiers Through User Feedback: An Analysis of SURF

The paper "SURF: Improving Classifiers in Production by Learning from Busy and Noisy End Users" presents a novel approach to enhancing the performance of supervised learning classifiers by leveraging feedback from end users. This research introduces the SURF algorithm, a significant contribution to classifier improvement techniques, particularly in environments where user feedback is both scarce and noisy due to various user-related factors like busyness or reluctance.

Problem Statement

With the increasing deployment of supervised learning systems in enterprises, maintaining high classification accuracy in dynamic production environments is challenging. A common issue is the reliance on feedback mechanisms where users can relabel misclassified data points. However, ambiguity arises when users do not respond, especially in cases where non-response might indicate either agreement or simply user unavailability.

Algorithmic Contribution: SURF

The paper critiques conventional crowdsourcing algorithms like Dawid-Skene for their inadequacy in handling feedback with non-response ambiguities. The authors propose SURF—Selective Use of useR Feedback—which extends Dawid-Skene by incorporating an estimation of each user's response rate (termed as busyness). This allows SURF to differentiate between diligent users, whose silence may indicate agreement, and busy or disengaged users, whose silence might mean the opposite.

Key Features of SURF:

  • Estimation of User Busyness: SURF estimates a user's likelihood of being unresponsive due to reasons other than agreement, enhancing the reliability of inferred ground truth from user-provided labels.
  • Handling Correlated Responses: By aligning user responses with the classifier's output in cases of non-response, SURF ensures a more accurate updating mechanism compared to conventional methods that assume independent user submissions.

Empirical Evaluation

The paper's experimental setup involves simulated user environments using the MNIST dataset. Focused experiments varying classifier accuracy, user noise, user busyness, and number of feedback providers demonstrate SURF’s robust performance across different scenarios.

Results:

  • Performance Under User Busyness: SURF maintains high accuracy even as user busyness increases, a scenario where traditional methods falter significantly.
  • Effective Correction of Noisy Classifiers: The algorithm successfully utilizes valid user feedback to correct mistakes made by inherently noisy classifiers.

Implications and Future Directions

SURF’s approach reflects a deeper understanding of user dynamics in feedback loops, providing practical implications for real-world deployment of classifiers. By recognizing user busyness, enterprises can fine-tune their feedback mechanisms to improve classifier accuracy continuously.

Potential Future Work:

  • Expanding to Diverse Environments: The methodology could be extended to more complex datasets and real-time feedback systems.
  • Integration with Adaptive Learning: Combining SURF with adaptive learning strategies could lead to even more substantial improvements in classifier resilience and adaptability.

Conclusion

The SURF algorithm represents a thoughtful advancement in refining classifier performance through feedback learning in noisy environments. Its ability to discern informative feedback despite ambiguous user responses sets a new benchmark in the field of interactive machine learning systems.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.