mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Limitations of Assessing Active Learning Performance at Runtime

arXiv 1901.10338 ↗First posted 29 Jan 2019cs.LG stat.MLcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Classification algorithms aim to predict an unknown label (e.g., a quality class) for a new instance (e.g., a product). Therefore, training samples (instances and labels) are used to deduct classification hypotheses. Often, it is relatively easy to capture instances but the acquisition of the corresponding labels remain difficult or expensive. Active learning algorithms select the most beneficial instances to be labeled to reduce cost. In research, this labeling procedure is simulated and therefore a ground truth is available. But during deployment, active learning is a one-shot problem and an evaluation set is not available. Hence, it is not possible to reliably estimate the performance of the classification system during learning and it is difficult to decide when the system fulfills the quality requirements (stopping criteria). In this article, we formalize the task and review existing strategies to assess the performance of an actively trained classifier during training. Furthermore, we identified three major challenges: 1)~to derive a performance distribution, 2)~to preserve representativeness of the labeled subset, and 3) to correct against sampling bias induced by an intelligent selection strategy. In a qualitative analysis, we evaluate different existing approaches and show that none of them reliably estimates active learning performance stating a major challenge for future research for such systems. All plots and experiments are provided in a Jupyter notebook that is available for download.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 29 Jan 2019.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 0; 2023: 1; 2024: 2.

6 papers.