Aries: Efficient Testing of Deep Neural Networks via Labeling-Free Accuracy Estimation

July 22, 2022 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐Ÿ› International Conference on Software Engineering

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 Qiang Hu, Yuejun Guo, Xiaofei Xie, Maxime Cordy, Lei Ma, Mike Papadakis, Yves Le Traon arXiv ID 2207.10942 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Cross-listed cs.AI Citations 23 Venue International Conference on Software Engineering Last Checked 3 months ago
Abstract
Deep learning (DL) plays a more and more important role in our daily life due to its competitive performance in industrial application domains. As the core of DL-enabled systems, deep neural networks (DNNs) need to be carefully evaluated to ensure the produced models match the expected requirements. In practice, the \emph{de facto standard} to assess the quality of DNNs in the industry is to check their performance (accuracy) on a collected set of labeled test data. However, preparing such labeled data is often not easy partly because of the huge labeling effort, i.e., data labeling is labor-intensive, especially with the massive new incoming unlabeled data every day. Recent studies show that test selection for DNN is a promising direction that tackles this issue by selecting minimal representative data to label and using these data to assess the model. However, it still requires human effort and cannot be automatic. In this paper, we propose a novel technique, named \textit{Aries}, that can estimate the performance of DNNs on new unlabeled data using only the information obtained from the original test data. The key insight behind our technique is that the model should have similar prediction accuracy on the data which have similar distances to the decision boundary. We performed a large-scale evaluation of our technique on two famous datasets, CIFAR-10 and Tiny-ImageNet, four widely studied DNN models including ResNet101 and DenseNet121, and 13 types of data transformation methods. Results show that the estimated accuracy by \textit{Aries} is only 0.03\% -- 2.60\% off the true accuracy. Besides, \textit{Aries} also outperforms the state-of-the-art labeling-free methods in 50 out of 52 cases and selection-labeling-based methods in 96 out of 128 cases.
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€” Software Engineering

Died the same way โ€” ๐Ÿ‘ป Ghosted