Showing 1–12 of 12 results for author: Coleman, C

Introducing v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark from MLCommons

Authors: Bertie Vidgen, Adarsh Agrawal, Ahmed M. Ahmed, Victor Akinwande, Namir Al-Nuaimi, Najla Alfaraj, Elie Alhajjar, Lora Aroyo, Trupti Bavalatti, Max Bartolo, Borhane Blili-Hamelin, Kurt Bollacker, Rishi Bomassani, Marisa Ferrara Boston, Siméon Campos, Kal Chakra, Canyu Chen, Cody Coleman, Zacharie Delpierre Coudert, Leon Derczynski, Debojyoti Dutta, Ian Eisenberg, James Ezick, Heather Frase, Brian Fuller , et al. (75 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: This paper introduces v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark, which has been created by the MLCommons AI Safety Working Group. The AI Safety Benchmark has been designed to assess the safety risks of AI systems that use chat-tuned language models. We introduce a principled approach to specifying and constructing the benchmark, which for v0.5 covers only a single use case (an adult chatting to a general-pu… ▽ More This paper introduces v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark, which has been created by the MLCommons AI Safety Working Group. The AI Safety Benchmark has been designed to assess the safety risks of AI systems that use chat-tuned language models. We introduce a principled approach to specifying and constructing the benchmark, which for v0.5 covers only a single use case (an adult chatting to a general-purpose assistant in English), and a limited set of personas (i.e., typical users, malicious users, and vulnerable users). We created a new taxonomy of 13 hazard categories, of which 7 have tests in the v0.5 benchmark. We plan to release version 1.0 of the AI Safety Benchmark by the end of 2024. The v1.0 benchmark will provide meaningful insights into the safety of AI systems. However, the v0.5 benchmark should not be used to assess the safety of AI systems. We have sought to fully document the limitations, flaws, and challenges of v0.5. This release of v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark includes (1) a principled approach to specifying and constructing the benchmark, which comprises use cases, types of systems under test (SUTs), language and context, personas, tests, and test items; (2) a taxonomy of 13 hazard categories with definitions and subcategories; (3) tests for seven of the hazard categories, each comprising a unique set of test items, i.e., prompts. There are 43,090 test items in total, which we created with templates; (4) a grading system for AI systems against the benchmark; (5) an openly available platform, and downloadable tool, called ModelBench that can be used to evaluate the safety of AI systems on the benchmark; (6) an example evaluation report which benchmarks the performance of over a dozen openly available chat-tuned language models; (7) a test specification for the benchmark. △ Less

Submitted 13 May, 2024; v1 submitted 18 April, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

DMLR: Data-centric Machine Learning Research -- Past, Present and Future

Authors: Luis Oala, Manil Maskey, Lilith Bat-Leah, Alicia Parrish, Nezihe Merve Gürel, Tzu-Sheng Kuo, Yang Liu, Rotem Dror, Danilo Brajovic, Xiaozhe Yao, Max Bartolo, William A Gaviria Rojas, Ryan Hileman, Rainier Aliment, Michael W. Mahoney, Meg Risdal, Matthew Lease, Wojciech Samek, Debojyoti Dutta, Curtis G Northcutt, Cody Coleman, Braden Hancock, Bernard Koch, Girmaw Abebe Tadesse, Bojan Karlaš , et al. (13 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: Drawing from discussions at the inaugural DMLR workshop at ICML 2023 and meetings prior, in this report we outline the relevance of community engagement and infrastructure development for the creation of next-generation public datasets that will advance machine learning science. We chart a path forward as a collective effort to sustain the creation and maintenance of these datasets and methods tow… ▽ More Drawing from discussions at the inaugural DMLR workshop at ICML 2023 and meetings prior, in this report we outline the relevance of community engagement and infrastructure development for the creation of next-generation public datasets that will advance machine learning science. We chart a path forward as a collective effort to sustain the creation and maintenance of these datasets and methods towards positive scientific, societal and business impact. △ Less

Submitted 1 June, 2024; v1 submitted 21 November, 2023; originally announced November 2023.

Comments: Published in the Journal of Data-centric Machine Learning Research (DMLR) at https://data.mlr.press/assets/pdf/v01-5.pdf

Do Cloud Developers Prefer CLIs or Web Consoles? CLIs Mostly, Though It Varies by Task

Authors: Cora Coleman, William G. Griswold, Nick Mitchell

Abstract: Despite the increased importance of Cloud tooling, and many large-scale studies of Cloud users, research has yet to answer what tool modalities (e.g. CLI or web console) developers prefer. In formulating our studies, we quickly found that preference varies heavily based on the programming task at hand. To address this gap, we conducted a two-part research study that quantifies modality preference… ▽ More Despite the increased importance of Cloud tooling, and many large-scale studies of Cloud users, research has yet to answer what tool modalities (e.g. CLI or web console) developers prefer. In formulating our studies, we quickly found that preference varies heavily based on the programming task at hand. To address this gap, we conducted a two-part research study that quantifies modality preference as a function of programming task. Part one surveys how preference for three tool modalities (CLI, IDE, web console) varies across three classes of task (CRUD, debugging, monitoring). The survey shows, among 60 respondents, developers most prefer the CLI modality, especially for CRUD tasks. Monitoring tasks are the exception for which developers prefer the web console. Part two observes how four participants complete a task using the kubectl CLI and the OpenShift web console. All four participants prefer using the CLI to accomplish the task. △ Less

Submitted 15 September, 2022; originally announced September 2022.

Comments: 13 pages, 7 figures

DataPerf: Benchmarks for Data-Centric AI Development

Authors: Mark Mazumder, Colby Banbury, Xiaozhe Yao, Bojan Karlaš, William Gaviria Rojas, Sudnya Diamos, Greg Diamos, Lynn He, Alicia Parrish, Hannah Rose Kirk, Jessica Quaye, Charvi Rastogi, Douwe Kiela, David Jurado, David Kanter, Rafael Mosquera, Juan Ciro, Lora Aroyo, Bilge Acun, Lingjiao Chen, Mehul Smriti Raje, Max Bartolo, Sabri Eyuboglu, Amirata Ghorbani, Emmett Goodman , et al. (20 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: Machine learning research has long focused on models rather than datasets, and prominent datasets are used for common ML tasks without regard to the breadth, difficulty, and faithfulness of the underlying problems. Neglecting the fundamental importance of data has given rise to inaccuracy, bias, and fragility in real-world applications, and research is hindered by saturation across existing datase… ▽ More Machine learning research has long focused on models rather than datasets, and prominent datasets are used for common ML tasks without regard to the breadth, difficulty, and faithfulness of the underlying problems. Neglecting the fundamental importance of data has given rise to inaccuracy, bias, and fragility in real-world applications, and research is hindered by saturation across existing dataset benchmarks. In response, we present DataPerf, a community-led benchmark suite for evaluating ML datasets and data-centric algorithms. We aim to foster innovation in data-centric AI through competition, comparability, and reproducibility. We enable the ML community to iterate on datasets, instead of just architectures, and we provide an open, online platform with multiple rounds of challenges to support this iterative development. The first iteration of DataPerf contains five benchmarks covering a wide spectrum of data-centric techniques, tasks, and modalities in vision, speech, acquisition, debugging, and diffusion prompting, and we support hosting new contributed benchmarks from the community. The benchmarks, online evaluation platform, and baseline implementations are open source, and the MLCommons Association will maintain DataPerf to ensure long-term benefits to academia and industry. △ Less

Submitted 13 October, 2023; v1 submitted 20 July, 2022; originally announced July 2022.

Comments: NeurIPS 2023 Datasets and Benchmarks Track

AI training resources for GLAM: a snapshot

Authors: Andrew Darby, Catherine Nicole Coleman, Claudia Engel, Daniel van Strien, Mike Trizna, Zachary W. Painter

Abstract: We take a snapshot of current resources available for teaching and learning AI with a focus on the Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums (GLAM) community. The review was carried out in 2021 and 2022. The review provides an overview of material we identified as being relevant, offers a description of this material and makes recommendations for future work in this area. We take a snapshot of current resources available for teaching and learning AI with a focus on the Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums (GLAM) community. The review was carried out in 2021 and 2022. The review provides an overview of material we identified as being relevant, offers a description of this material and makes recommendations for future work in this area. △ Less

Submitted 10 May, 2022; originally announced May 2022.

MedPerf: Open Benchmarking Platform for Medical Artificial Intelligence using Federated Evaluation

Authors: Alexandros Karargyris, Renato Umeton, Micah J. Sheller, Alejandro Aristizabal, Johnu George, Srini Bala, Daniel J. Beutel, Victor Bittorf, Akshay Chaudhari, Alexander Chowdhury, Cody Coleman, Bala Desinghu, Gregory Diamos, Debo Dutta, Diane Feddema, Grigori Fursin, Junyi Guo, Xinyuan Huang, David Kanter, Satyananda Kashyap, Nicholas Lane, Indranil Mallick, Pietro Mascagni, Virendra Mehta, Vivek Natarajan , et al. (17 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: Medical AI has tremendous potential to advance healthcare by supporting the evidence-based practice of medicine, personalizing patient treatment, reducing costs, and improving provider and patient experience. We argue that unlocking this potential requires a systematic way to measure the performance of medical AI models on large-scale heterogeneous data. To meet this need, we are building MedPerf,… ▽ More Medical AI has tremendous potential to advance healthcare by supporting the evidence-based practice of medicine, personalizing patient treatment, reducing costs, and improving provider and patient experience. We argue that unlocking this potential requires a systematic way to measure the performance of medical AI models on large-scale heterogeneous data. To meet this need, we are building MedPerf, an open framework for benchmarking machine learning in the medical domain. MedPerf will enable federated evaluation in which models are securely distributed to different facilities for evaluation, thereby empowering healthcare organizations to assess and verify the performance of AI models in an efficient and human-supervised process, while prioritizing privacy. We describe the current challenges healthcare and AI communities face, the need for an open platform, the design philosophy of MedPerf, its current implementation status, and our roadmap. We call for researchers and organizations to join us in creating the MedPerf open benchmarking platform. △ Less

Submitted 28 December, 2021; v1 submitted 29 September, 2021; originally announced October 2021.

Similarity Search for Efficient Active Learning and Search of Rare Concepts

Authors: Cody Coleman, Edward Chou, Julian Katz-Samuels, Sean Culatana, Peter Bailis, Alexander C. Berg, Robert Nowak, Roshan Sumbaly, Matei Zaharia, I. Zeki Yalniz

Abstract: Many active learning and search approaches are intractable for large-scale industrial settings with billions of unlabeled examples. Existing approaches search globally for the optimal examples to label, scaling linearly or even quadratically with the unlabeled data. In this paper, we improve the computational efficiency of active learning and search methods by restricting the candidate pool for la… ▽ More Many active learning and search approaches are intractable for large-scale industrial settings with billions of unlabeled examples. Existing approaches search globally for the optimal examples to label, scaling linearly or even quadratically with the unlabeled data. In this paper, we improve the computational efficiency of active learning and search methods by restricting the candidate pool for labeling to the nearest neighbors of the currently labeled set instead of scanning over all of the unlabeled data. We evaluate several selection strategies in this setting on three large-scale computer vision datasets: ImageNet, OpenImages, and a de-identified and aggregated dataset of 10 billion images provided by a large internet company. Our approach achieved similar mean average precision and recall as the traditional global approach while reducing the computational cost of selection by up to three orders of magnitude, thus enabling web-scale active learning. △ Less

Submitted 22 July, 2021; v1 submitted 30 June, 2020; originally announced July 2020.

MLPerf Inference Benchmark

Authors: Vijay Janapa Reddi, Christine Cheng, David Kanter, Peter Mattson, Guenther Schmuelling, Carole-Jean Wu, Brian Anderson, Maximilien Breughe, Mark Charlebois, William Chou, Ramesh Chukka, Cody Coleman, Sam Davis, Pan Deng, Greg Diamos, Jared Duke, Dave Fick, J. Scott Gardner, Itay Hubara, Sachin Idgunji, Thomas B. Jablin, Jeff Jiao, Tom St. John, Pankaj Kanwar, David Lee , et al. (22 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: Machine-learning (ML) hardware and software system demand is burgeoning. Driven by ML applications, the number of different ML inference systems has exploded. Over 100 organizations are building ML inference chips, and the systems that incorporate existing models span at least three orders of magnitude in power consumption and five orders of magnitude in performance; they range from embedded devic… ▽ More Machine-learning (ML) hardware and software system demand is burgeoning. Driven by ML applications, the number of different ML inference systems has exploded. Over 100 organizations are building ML inference chips, and the systems that incorporate existing models span at least three orders of magnitude in power consumption and five orders of magnitude in performance; they range from embedded devices to data-center solutions. Fueling the hardware are a dozen or more software frameworks and libraries. The myriad combinations of ML hardware and ML software make assessing ML-system performance in an architecture-neutral, representative, and reproducible manner challenging. There is a clear need for industry-wide standard ML benchmarking and evaluation criteria. MLPerf Inference answers that call. In this paper, we present our benchmarking method for evaluating ML inference systems. Driven by more than 30 organizations as well as more than 200 ML engineers and practitioners, MLPerf prescribes a set of rules and best practices to ensure comparability across systems with wildly differing architectures. The first call for submissions garnered more than 600 reproducible inference-performance measurements from 14 organizations, representing over 30 systems that showcase a wide range of capabilities. The submissions attest to the benchmark's flexibility and adaptability. △ Less

Submitted 9 May, 2020; v1 submitted 6 November, 2019; originally announced November 2019.

Comments: ISCA 2020

MLPerf Training Benchmark

Authors: Peter Mattson, Christine Cheng, Cody Coleman, Greg Diamos, Paulius Micikevicius, David Patterson, Hanlin Tang, Gu-Yeon Wei, Peter Bailis, Victor Bittorf, David Brooks, Dehao Chen, Debojyoti Dutta, Udit Gupta, Kim Hazelwood, Andrew Hock, Xinyuan Huang, Atsushi Ike, Bill Jia, Daniel Kang, David Kanter, Naveen Kumar, Jeffery Liao, Guokai Ma, Deepak Narayanan , et al. (12 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: Machine learning (ML) needs industry-standard performance benchmarks to support design and competitive evaluation of the many emerging software and hardware solutions for ML. But ML training presents three unique benchmarking challenges absent from other domains: optimizations that improve training throughput can increase the time to solution, training is stochastic and time to solution exhibits h… ▽ More Machine learning (ML) needs industry-standard performance benchmarks to support design and competitive evaluation of the many emerging software and hardware solutions for ML. But ML training presents three unique benchmarking challenges absent from other domains: optimizations that improve training throughput can increase the time to solution, training is stochastic and time to solution exhibits high variance, and software and hardware systems are so diverse that fair benchmarking with the same binary, code, and even hyperparameters is difficult. We therefore present MLPerf, an ML benchmark that overcomes these challenges. Our analysis quantitatively evaluates MLPerf's efficacy at driving performance and scalability improvements across two rounds of results from multiple vendors. △ Less

Submitted 2 March, 2020; v1 submitted 2 October, 2019; originally announced October 2019.

Comments: MLSys 2020

Selection via Proxy: Efficient Data Selection for Deep Learning

Authors: Cody Coleman, Christopher Yeh, Stephen Mussmann, Baharan Mirzasoleiman, Peter Bailis, Percy Liang, Jure Leskovec, Matei Zaharia

Abstract: Data selection methods, such as active learning and core-set selection, are useful tools for machine learning on large datasets. However, they can be prohibitively expensive to apply in deep learning because they depend on feature representations that need to be learned. In this work, we show that we can greatly improve the computational efficiency by using a small proxy model to perform data sele… ▽ More Data selection methods, such as active learning and core-set selection, are useful tools for machine learning on large datasets. However, they can be prohibitively expensive to apply in deep learning because they depend on feature representations that need to be learned. In this work, we show that we can greatly improve the computational efficiency by using a small proxy model to perform data selection (e.g., selecting data points to label for active learning). By removing hidden layers from the target model, using smaller architectures, and training for fewer epochs, we create proxies that are an order of magnitude faster to train. Although these small proxy models have higher error rates, we find that they empirically provide useful signals for data selection. We evaluate this "selection via proxy" (SVP) approach on several data selection tasks across five datasets: CIFAR10, CIFAR100, ImageNet, Amazon Review Polarity, and Amazon Review Full. For active learning, applying SVP can give an order of magnitude improvement in data selection runtime (i.e., the time it takes to repeatedly train and select points) without significantly increasing the final error (often within 0.1%). For core-set selection on CIFAR10, proxies that are over 10x faster to train than their larger, more accurate targets can remove up to 50% of the data without harming the final accuracy of the target, leading to a 1.6x end-to-end training time improvement. △ Less

Submitted 26 October, 2020; v1 submitted 26 June, 2019; originally announced June 2019.

Comments: ICLR 2020

Analysis of DAWNBench, a Time-to-Accuracy Machine Learning Performance Benchmark

Authors: Cody Coleman, Daniel Kang, Deepak Narayanan, Luigi Nardi, Tian Zhao, Jian Zhang, Peter Bailis, Kunle Olukotun, Chris Re, Matei Zaharia

Abstract: Researchers have proposed hardware, software, and algorithmic optimizations to improve the computational performance of deep learning. While some of these optimizations perform the same operations faster (e.g., increasing GPU clock speed), many others modify the semantics of the training procedure (e.g., reduced precision), and can impact the final model's accuracy on unseen data. Due to a lack of… ▽ More Researchers have proposed hardware, software, and algorithmic optimizations to improve the computational performance of deep learning. While some of these optimizations perform the same operations faster (e.g., increasing GPU clock speed), many others modify the semantics of the training procedure (e.g., reduced precision), and can impact the final model's accuracy on unseen data. Due to a lack of standard evaluation criteria that considers these trade-offs, it is difficult to directly compare these optimizations. To address this problem, we recently introduced DAWNBench, a benchmark competition focused on end-to-end training time to achieve near-state-of-the-art accuracy on an unseen dataset---a combined metric called time-to-accuracy (TTA). In this work, we analyze the entries from DAWNBench, which received optimized submissions from multiple industrial groups, to investigate the behavior of TTA as a metric as well as trends in the best-performing entries. We show that TTA has a low coefficient of variation and that models optimized for TTA generalize nearly as well as those trained using standard methods. Additionally, even though DAWNBench entries were able to train ImageNet models in under 3 minutes, we find they still underutilize hardware capabilities such as Tensor Cores. Furthermore, we find that distributed entries can spend more than half of their time on communication. We show similar findings with entries to the MLPERF v0.5 benchmark. △ Less

Submitted 1 December, 2019; v1 submitted 4 June, 2018; originally announced June 2018.

Open Set Intrusion Recognition for Fine-Grained Attack Categorization

Authors: Steve Cruz, Cora Coleman, Ethan M. Rudd, Terrance E. Boult

Abstract: Confidently distinguishing a malicious intrusion over a network is an important challenge. Most intrusion detection system evaluations have been performed in a closed set protocol in which only classes seen during training are considered during classification. Thus far, there has been no realistic application in which novel types of behaviors unseen at training -- unknown classes as it were -- mus… ▽ More Confidently distinguishing a malicious intrusion over a network is an important challenge. Most intrusion detection system evaluations have been performed in a closed set protocol in which only classes seen during training are considered during classification. Thus far, there has been no realistic application in which novel types of behaviors unseen at training -- unknown classes as it were -- must be recognized for manual categorization. This paper comparatively evaluates malware classification using both closed set and open set protocols for intrusion recognition on the KDDCUP'99 dataset. In contrast to much of the previous work, we employ a fine-grained recognition protocol, in which the dataset is loosely open set -- i.e., recognizing individual intrusion types -- e.g., "sendmail", "snmp guess", ..., etc., rather than more general attack categories (e.g., "DoS","Probe","R2L","U2R","Normal"). We also employ two different classifier types -- Gaussian RBF kernel SVMs, which are not theoretically guaranteed to bound open space risk, and W-SVMs, which are theoretically guaranteed to bound open space risk. We find that the W-SVM offers superior performance under the open set regime, particularly as the cost of misclassifying unknown classes at query time (i.e., classes not present in the training set) increases. Results of performance tradeoff with respect to cost of unknown as well as discussion of the ramifications of these findings in an operational setting are presented. △ Less

Submitted 7 March, 2017; originally announced March 2017.

Comments: Pre-print of camera-ready version to appear at the IEEE Homeland Security Technologies (HST) 2017 Conference