mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Evaluating the Efficacy of Instance Incremental vs. Batch Learning in Delayed Label Environments: An Empirical Study on Tabular Data Streaming for Fraud Detection

arXiv 2409.10111 ↗First posted 16 Sep 2024cs.LG cs.CE cs.NEcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Real-world tabular learning production scenarios typically involve evolving data streams, where data arrives continuously and its distribution may change over time. In such a setting, most studies in the literature regarding supervised learning favor the use of instance incremental algorithms due to their ability to adapt to changes in the data distribution. Another significant reason for choosing these algorithms is textitavoid storing observations in memory as commonly done in batch incremental settings. However, the design of instance incremental algorithms often assumes immediate availability of labels, which is an optimistic assumption. In many real-world scenarios, such as fraud detection or credit scoring, labels may be delayed. Consequently, batch incremental algorithms are widely used in many real-world tasks. This raises an important question: "In delayed settings, is instance incremental learning the best option regarding predictive performance and computational efficiency?" Unfortunately, this question has not been studied in depth, probably due to the scarcity of real datasets containing delayed information. In this study, we conduct a comprehensive empirical evaluation and analysis of this question using a real-world fraud detection problem and commonly used generated datasets. Our findings indicate that instance incremental learning is not the superior option, considering on one side state-of-the-art models such as Adaptive Random Forest (ARF) and other side batch learning models such as XGBoost. Additionally, when considering the interpretability of the learning systems, batch incremental solutions tend to be favored. Code: urlhttps://github.com/anselmeamekoe/DelayedLabelStream

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Sep 2024.

Builds on

11 of 30 references.

References · 11

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  2. 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
  3. 2019Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Frameworkcited by 2,501
  4. 2019InterpretML: A Unified Framework for Machine Learning Interpretabilitycited by 246
  5. 2020Problems with Shapley-value-based explanations as feature importance measurescited by 200
  6. 2020River: machine learning for streaming data in Pythoncited by 98
  7. 2022A survey on learning from imbalanced data streams: taxonomy, challenges, empirical study, and reproducible experimental frameworkcited by 39
  8. 2021A Survey on Semi-Supervised Learning for Delayed Partially Labelled Data Streamscited by 15
  9. 2022Dynamic Model Tree for Interpretable Data Stream Learningcited by 6
  10. 2022Standardized Evaluation of Machine Learning Methods for Evolving Data Streamscited by 4
  11. 2023iSAGE: An Incremental Version of SAGE for Online Explanation on Data Streamscited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.