Preventing failures due to dataset shift: Learning predictive models that transport

AISTATS 2019 - 22nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics

Volumn , Issue , 2020, Pages

  Subbaswamy, Adarsh ^a   Schulam, Peter ^a   Saria, Suchi ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; SURGERY;

CAUSAL DIAGRAM; DATA-DRIVEN APPROACH; DATASET SHIFTS; INCORPORATING PRIOR KNOWLEDGE; INTERVENTIONAL; PREDICTIVE MODELS; PRO-ACTIVE APPROACH; SIMULATED EXPERIMENTS;

LEARNING SYSTEMS;

EID: 85085016703     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. Bareinboim, E. and Pearl, J. (2012). Transportability of causal effects: Completeness results. In AAAI, pages 698-704.
2. Dheeru, D. and Karra Taniskidou, E. (2017). UCI machine learning repository.
3. Fanaee-T, H. and Gama, J. (2013). Event labeling combining ensemble detectors and background knowledge. Progress in Artificial Intelligence, pages 1-15.
4. Gong, M., Zhang, K., Liu, T., Tao, D., Glymour, C., and Schölkopf, B. (2016). Domain adaptation with conditional transferable components. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 2839-2848.
5. Gretton, A., Smola, A. J., Huang, J., Schmittfull, M., Borgwardt, K. M., and Schölkopf, B. (2009). Covariate shift by kernel mean matching. In Quiñonero-Candela, J., Sugiyama, M., Schwaighofer, A., and Lawrence, N. D., editors, Dataset shift in machine learning, chapter 2, pages 131-160. The MIT Press.
6. Koller, D. and Friedman, N. (2009). Probabilistic graphical models: principles and techniques. MIT press.
7. Lipton, Z. C., Wang, Y.-X., and Smola, A. (2018). Detecting and correcting for label shift with black box predictors. In International Conference on Machine Learning.
8. Lum, K. and Isaac, W. (2016). To predict and serve? Significance, 13(5):14-19.
9. Magliacane, S., van Ommen, T., Claassen, T., Bongers, S., Versteeg, P., and Mooij, J. M. (2018). Domain adaptation by using causal inference to predict invariant conditional distributions. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Second Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems.
10. Meinshausen, N. (2018). Causality from a distributional robustness point of view. In 2018 IEEE Data Science Workshop (DSW), pages 6-10. IEEE.
11. Pearl, J. (1998). Graphical models for probabilistic and causal reasoning. In Quantified representation of uncertainty and imprecision, pages 367-389. Springer.
12. Pearl, J. (2009). Causality. Cambridge university press.
13. Pearl, J. and Bareinboim, E. (2011). Transportability of causal and statistical relations: a formal approach. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 247-254. AAAI Press.
14. Peters, J., Janzing, D., and Schölkopf, B. (2017). Elements of causal inference: foundations and learning algorithms. MIT press.
15. Quiñonero-Candela, J., Sugiyama, M., Schwaighofer, A., and Lawrence, N. D. (2009). Dataset shift in machine learning.
16. Rojas-Carulla, M., Schölkopf, B., Turner, R., and Peters, J. (2018). Invariant models for causal transfer learning. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 19(36).
17. Rothenhäusler, D., Bühlmann, P., Meinshausen, N., and Peters, J. (2018). Anchor regression: heterogeneous data meets causality. arXiv preprint arXiv:1801.06229.
18. Schölkopf, B., Janzing, D., Peters, J., Sgouritsa, E., Zhang, K., and Mooij, J. (2012). On causal and anticausal learning. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 459-466.
19. Schulam, P. and Saria, S. (2017). Reliable decision support using counterfactual models. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pages 1697-1708.
20. Shpitser, I. and Pearl, J. (2006a). Identification of conditional interventional distributions. In 22nd Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, UAI 2006, pages 437-444.
21. Shpitser, I. and Pearl, J. (2006b). Identification of joint interventional distributions in recursive semimarkovian causal models. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 21, page 1219.
22. Sinha, A., Namkoong, H., and Duchi, J. (2018). Certifying some distributional robustness with principled adversarial training. In ICLR.
23. Spirtes, P., Glymour, C. N., Scheines, R., Heckerman, D., Meek, C., Cooper, G., and Richardson, T. (2000). Causation, prediction, and search. MIT press.
24. Storkey, A. (2009). When training and test sets are different: characterizing learning transfer. Dataset shift in machine learning, pages 3-28.
25. Subbaswamy, A. and Saria, S. (2018). Counterfactual normalization: Proactively addressing dataset shift and improving reliability using causal mechanisms. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence.
26. Sugiyama, M., Krauledat, M., and MÞller, K.-R. (2007). Covariate shift adaptation by importance weighted cross validation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 8(May):985-1005.
27. Tian, J. and Pearl, J. (2002). A general identification condition for causal effects. In AAAI.
28. Verma, T. and Pearl, J. (1991). Equivalence and synthesis of causal models. In Proceedings of Sixth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pages 220-227.
29. Zech, J. R., Badgeley, M. A., Liu, M., Costa, A. B., Titano, J. J., and Oermann, E. K. (2018). Variable generalization performance of a deep learning model to detect pneumonia in chest radiographs: A cross-sectional study. PLoS medicine, 15(11):e1002683.
30. Zhang, K., Gong, M., and Schölkopf, B. (2015). Multisource domain adaptation: A causal view. In AAAI, pages 3150-3157.
31. Zhang, K., Schölkopf, B., Muandet, K., and Wang, Z. (2013). Domain adaptation under target and conditional shift. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 819-827.