mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Addressing Bias in Active Learning with Depth Uncertainty Networks... or Not

arXiv 2112.06926 ↗First posted 13 Dec 2021cs.LG stat.MLcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Farquhar et al. [2021] show that correcting for active learning bias with underparameterised models leads to improved downstream performance. For overparameterised models such as NNs, however, correction leads either to decreased or unchanged performance. They suggest that this is due to an "overfitting bias" which offsets the active learning bias. We show that depth uncertainty networks operate in a low overfitting regime, much like underparameterised models. They should therefore see an increase in performance with bias correction. Surprisingly, they do not. We propose that this negative result, as well as the results Farquhar et al. [2021], can be explained via the lens of the bias-variance decomposition of generalisation error.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 15 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Dec 2021.

Builds on

8 of 15 references.

References · 8

  1. 2015Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shiftcited by 7,005
  2. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,448
  3. 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,290
  4. 2020Underspecification Presents Challenges for Credibility in Modern Machine Learningcited by 496
  5. 2015Probabilistic Backpropagation for Scalable Learning of Bayesian Neural Networkscited by 295
  6. 2021On Statistical Bias In Active Learning: How and When To Fix Itcited by 75
  7. 2020Depth Uncertainty in Neural Networkscited by 57
  8. 2017Model Selection in Bayesian Neural Networks via Horseshoe Priorscited by 52

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 0; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

3 papers.