mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Time to Retrain? Detecting Concept Drifts in Machine Learning Systems

arXiv 2410.09190 ↗First posted 11 Oct 2024cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

With the boom of machine learning (ML) techniques, software practitioners build ML systems to process the massive volume of streaming data for diverse software engineering tasks such as failure prediction in AIOps. Trained using historical data, such ML models encounter performance degradation caused by concept drift, i.e., data and inter-relationship (concept) changes between training and production. It is essential to use concept rift detection to monitor the deployed ML models and re-train the ML models when needed. In this work, we explore applying state-of-the-art (SOTA) concept drift detection techniques on synthetic and real-world datasets in an industrial setting. Such an industrial setting requires minimal manual effort in labeling and maximal generality in ML model architecture. We find that current SOTA semi-supervised methods not only require significant labeling effort but also only work for certain types of ML models. To overcome such limitations, we propose a novel model-agnostic technique (CDSeer) for detecting concept drift. Our evaluation shows that CDSeer has better precision and recall compared to the state-of-the-art while requiring significantly less manual labeling. We demonstrate the effectiveness of CDSeer at concept drift detection by evaluating it on eight datasets from different domains and use cases. Results from internal deployment of CDSeer on an industrial proprietary dataset show a 57.1% improvement in precision while using 99% fewer labels compared to the SOTA concept drift detection method. The performance is also comparable to the supervised concept drift detection method, which requires 100% of the data to be labeled. The improved performance and ease of adoption of CDSeer are valuable in making ML systems more reliable.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 90 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Oct 2024.

Builds on

16 of 90 references.

References · 16

  1. 2017Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithmscited by 4,283
  2. 2016A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networkscited by 2,362
  3. 2021Generalized Out-of-Distribution Detection: A Surveycited by 796
  4. 2022Out-of-Distribution Detection with Deep Nearest Neighborscited by 596
  5. 2020Learning under Concept Drift: A Reviewcited by 470
  6. 2019Machine Learning Testing: Survey, Landscapes and Horizonscited by 213
  7. 2019Addressing Failure Prediction by Learning Model Confidencecited by 183
  8. 2022From Concept Drift to Model Degradation: An Overview on Performance-Aware Drift Detectorscited by 82
  9. 2018Scikit-Multiflow: A Multi-output Streaming Frameworkcited by 70
  10. 2019Robustness of Neural Networks: A Probabilistic and Practical Approachcited by 38
  11. 2017On the Reliable Detection of Concept Drift from Streaming Unlabeled Datacited by 32
  12. 2021Detecting Concept Drift With Neural Network Model Uncertaintycited by 21
4 more
  1. 2021STUDD: A Student-Teacher Method for Unsupervised Concept Drift Detectioncited by 18
  2. 2019Detecting Overfitting via Adversarial Examplescited by 15
  3. 2018Handling Adversarial Concept Drift in Streaming Datacited by 5
  4. 2023On the Model Update Strategies for Supervised Learning in AIOps Solutionscited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.