NeuRecover: Regression-Controlled Repair of Deep Neural Networks with Training History

March 01, 2022 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐Ÿ› IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution, and Reengineering

๐Ÿ‘ป CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Shogo Tokui, Susumu Tokumoto, Akihito Yoshii, Fuyuki Ishikawa, Takao Nakagawa, Kazuki Munakata, Shinji Kikuchi arXiv ID 2203.00191 Category cs.LG: Machine Learning Cross-listed cs.NE, cs.SE Citations 33 Venue IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution, and Reengineering Last Checked 6 months ago
Abstract
Systematic techniques to improve quality of deep neural networks (DNNs) are critical given the increasing demand for practical applications including safety-critical ones. The key challenge comes from the little controllability in updating DNNs. Retraining to fix some behavior often has a destructive impact on other behavior, causing regressions, i.e., the updated DNN fails with inputs correctly handled by the original one. This problem is crucial when engineers are required to investigate failures in intensive assurance activities for safety or trust. Search-based repair techniques for DNNs have potentials to tackle this challenge by enabling localized updates only on "responsible parameters" inside the DNN. However, the potentials have not been explored to realize sufficient controllability to suppress regressions in DNN repair tasks. In this paper, we propose a novel DNN repair method that makes use of the training history for judging which DNN parameters should be changed or not to suppress regressions. We implemented the method into a tool called NeuRecover and evaluated it with three datasets. Our method outperformed the existing method by achieving often less than a quarter, even a tenth in some cases, number of regressions. Our method is especially effective when the repair requirements are tight to fix specific failure types. In such cases, our method showed stably low rates (<2%) of regressions, which were in many cases a tenth of regressions caused by retraining.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Machine Learning

Died the same way โ€” ๐Ÿ‘ป Ghosted