AutoML-GPT; Causal Reasoning and LLMs; MetaGPT; Free Access to GPT-4; Weekly Concept; To Handle Increased Stress, build resilience; and more.

Papers of the Week

AutoML-GPT: Automatic Machine Learning with GPT: The article proposes using large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, to automate the training pipeline for AI models. They suggest developing task-oriented prompts and automatically utilizing LLMs to train models with optimized hyperparameters dynamically. The authors present AutoML-GPT, which employs GPT as the bridge to diverse AI models and takes user requests from models and data cards to compose the corresponding prompt paragraph. This approach achieves remarkable results in computer vision, natural language processing, and other challenging areas. Extensive experiments and ablation studies demonstrate that AutoML-GPT can be general, effective, and beneficial for many AI tasks.

Should ChatGPT and Bard Share Revenue with Their Data Providers? A New Business Model for the AI Era: The article proposes that AI tools, such as large language models like ChatGPT, should share revenue with their data providers in addition to traditional stakeholders and shareholders. Current copyright laws limit the access of AI tools to various types of data, which are necessary for continuous improvement. Revenue sharing could transform the hostile relationship between AI tools and data owners into a collaborative and mutually beneficial one, creating a virtuous cycle among AI tools, their users, and data providers. However, current revenue-sharing business models do not work for AI tools in the forthcoming AI era, which will be driven by new metrics such as prompts and cost per prompt for generative AI tools. The article discusses how to build a prompt-based scoring system to measure the data engagement of each data provider based on classification and content similarity models. Sharing revenue with data providers using such a scoring system would encourage more data owners to participate in the revenue-sharing program, creating a utilitarian AI era where all parties benefit.

Causal Reasoning and Large Language Models: Opening a New Frontier for Causality: The article discusses the debate surrounding the causal capabilities of large language models (LLMs) and their implications for fields such as medicine, science, law, and policy. The authors explore the distinctions between different types of causal reasoning tasks and the threats of construct and measurement validity. They find that LLM-based methods outperform existing algorithms on multiple causal benchmarks and exhibit unpredictable failure modes. LLMs bring capabilities previously thought to be restricted to humans, such as generating causal graphs and identifying background causal context from natural language. The authors suggest using LLMs alongside existing causal methods to reduce human effort and formalize, validate, and communicate LLM reasoning in high-stakes scenarios. LLMs open new frontiers for advancing the research, practice, and adoption of causality.

Revisiting Graph Contrastive Learning for Anomaly Detection: The article discusses the rising trend of combining neural graph networks (GNNs) with contrastive learning for anomaly detection. While existing graph contrastive anomaly detection (GCAD) methods have primarily focused on improving detection capability through graph augmentation and multi-scale contrast modules, the underlying mechanisms of how these modules work have not been fully explored. The authors observe that multi-scale contrast modules do not enhance the expression, while multi-GNN modules are the hidden contributors. The authors propose a Multi-GNN and Augmented Graph Contrastive Framework (MAG), which unifies existing GCAD methods from a contrastive self-supervised perspective. Two variants, L-MAG and M-MAG, are extracted from the MAG framework, with the latter equipped with multi-GNN modules that further improve detection performance. The study sheds light on the drawbacks of existing GCAD methods and demonstrates the potential of multi-GNN and graph augmentation modules. The code is available at this https URL.

Industry Insights

• The Full Story of Large Language Models and RLHF
• ‘Godfather of AI’ Geoffrey Hinton quits Google and warns of the dangers of misinformation
• Meet MetaGPT: A GPT-4-powered Application That Can Create Websites, Apps, And More Based Only On Natural Language Prompts
• Microsoft axes Bing wait list, giving users free access to GPT-4
• Meet LLaVA: A Large Language Multimodal Model and Vision Assistant that Connects a Vision Encoder and Vicuna for General-Purpose Visual and Language Understanding
• CEO of Google’s DeepMind says we could be ‘just a few years from A.I. that has human-level intelligence

--

Are you looking to advertise a product, job opening, or event to an audience of over 30,000 AI researchers and engineers? Get in touch with us at [email protected] to explore your options.

Enjoy the newsletter? Help us make it bigger and better by sharing it with colleagues and friends.

--

Weekly Concept Breakdown

In machine learning, data science, and statistics, the F-score is a metric used to evaluate the performance of a machine learning model. It combines precision and recall into a single score.

The F-score is a widely used metric in various applications that involve binary classification tasks and is particularly useful in situations where the dataset is imbalanced and one class has significantly fewer instances than the other.

The F-score is also used in information retrieval, where precision and recall are important metrics for evaluating the performance of search engines and recommendation systems.

The F1-score is the harmonic mean of precision and recall. It thus symmetrically represents both precision and recall in one metric. The more generic F-beta score applies additional weights, valuing one of precision or recall more than the other.

Two commonly used values for the beta are 2, which weights recall higher than precision, and 0.5, which weights recall lower than precision.

Dependence of the F-score on class imbalance

The Precision-Recall curve and F-score are affected by the ratio of positive to negative test cases, making it difficult to compare F-scores across different problems with varying class ratios. One solution to this issue is to use a standard class ratio when making such comparisons.

Criticism

Critics, such as David Hand and others, argue that the F1 score is flawed because it gives equal importance to precision and recall. At the same time, different types of misclassifications may have different costs.

The Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) is a more truthful and informative metric for binary classification.

Notable remarks about the F-score:

•  The F-score is sometimes referred to as the F-measure, F1 score, or Fβ score, where β is a parameter that allows you to adjust the emphasis on either precision or recall.
• When β=1, the F-score is equivalent to the F1 score, which is the most commonly used variant of the metric.
• The F-score is widely used to evaluate the performance of models in the annual ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge (ILSVRC). In this competition, researchers worldwide submit their models for object recognition tasks.
• Some popular machine learning libraries, such as scikit-learn and TensorFlow, include built-in functions for calculating the F-score.
• The F-score is commonly used alongside other performance metrics such as accuracy, AUC (area under the curve), and ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curves to comprehensively evaluate a model's performance.

Growth Zone

• To Handle Increased Stress, Build Your Resilience
•  How to Speak Up in a Meeting, and When to Hold Back

Motivational Spark

This quote by Eric is a powerful reminder that success is not just about talent or skill but also about resilience and perseverance. Our perception of failure and our response to it can make all the difference in achieving our goals.

When we encounter failure, it's easy to feel defeated, to give up, and to believe that we don't have what it takes to succeed. However, the truth is that failure is an essential part of the journey toward success. Every successful person has experienced failure and setbacks along the way. Their ability to bounce back, learn from their mistakes, and keep going sets them apart.

Geoffrey Hinton is an example of a scientist in the AI field who demonstrated resilience, perseverance, and innovation on his path to success. As a computer scientist and cognitive psychologist, Hinton faced skepticism and disinterest from the AI community when he began his work on neural networks. However, he remained dedicated to his research and continued to develop new techniques and algorithms for deep learning.

One of Hinton's most significant contributions to the field of AI was his work on backpropagation, a technique used in neural networks to improve the accuracy of predictions. Some researchers initially dismissed this technique as impractical, but Hinton persisted and eventually proved the effectiveness of backpropagation.

Hinton's story is a powerful reminder that success in AI, like any other field, requires resilience, persistence, and a willingness to take risks and push the boundaries of what is possible. By remaining focused on our goals, persevering through setbacks and challenges, and continuing to innovate and develop new techniques and algorithms, we can achieve great things and impact the world, just like Geoffrey Hinton did.

Expert Advice

"Feature engineering is the key" underscores the importance of the foundational work involved in machine learning models. It represents the realization that the quality of the inputs to a machine learning model is often more important than the model's sophistication. In essence, feature engineering is the art of transforming raw data into meaningful representations that can be used to create accurate and effective models.

Feature engineering involves taking a step back from the mechanics of a machine learning model and considering the data itself. It requires a deep understanding of the problem being solved and the context in which the data is generated. The process of feature engineering is a balance of art and science, where creativity and intuition combine with technical expertise to craft features that capture the most critical information from the data.

A sharp example of the power of feature engineering is image recognition. The quality of the features used in image recognition models can significantly impact their performance. For example, by training a deep neural network on the raw pixel values of an image, the model might struggle to recognize patterns or distinguish between objects with similar shapes. However, the model can learn to recognize objects more accurately by engineering features such as edges, corners, or shapes.

The philosophical underpinnings of feature engineering are significant. It represents a fundamental truth that often applies to problem-solving more broadly. That is, focusing on the quality of the inputs can be just as important as the complexity of the solution. By taking the time to consider the inputs carefully, we can create more effective and impactful solutions, no matter the domain.