Ivor Cribben and Anastasiou Andreas’s contribution to the Discussion of ‘the Discussion Meeting on Probabilistic and statistical aspects of machine learning’
Cribben 与 Anastasiou 对机器学习概率统计讨论会论文的评论AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:评论明确讨论时间序列变化点标注、在线检测和多变化点扩展,直接对应结构变化与时间序列方法。
Cribben 与 Anastasiou 对机器学习概率统计讨论会论文的评论AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
We extend our congratulations to the authors for their innovative contribution. Here, we address three key points: change-point labelling, handling imbalanced datasets, and computational complexity. Change-point labelling in datasets has many flaws and challenges. The primary flaw is the subjectivity inherent in the task as it often relies on human judgement. This subjectivity introduces biases and inconsistencies. One challenge is the lack of a universally accepted standard for change-point labelling unlike other machine learning classification problems. Hence, it is difficult to compare results across studies, hindering reproducibility and reliability. A further issue is that change-point labelling can be a time-consuming and labour-intensive task, especially for large and complex time series datasets. This process often requires domain expertise and can be impractical for real-time or high-frequency data analysis. Imbalanced class distributions in datasets are another issue. Change-points are often rarer than normal instances, but imbalanced datasets can lead to skewed evaluation results, with methods prioritizing the majority class and failing to effectively detect true change-points or managing an excessive rate of false positives. We wonder whether the authors explored examples of imbalanced data, specifically those involving significant changes in approximately half of the dataset (N/2). It is important to underscore that addressing the labelling and imbalance challenges is pivotal for change-point methods that rely on training neural networks. The sample size used for training neural networks plays a crucial role in determining the model’s performance and generalizability. An excessively large sample size might lead to increased computational costs and training time without significant gains in performance after a certain point. In the first step of the proposed algorithm, there is the necessity of training a neural network using a considerable sample size. A discussion on this topic could convince the reader that the proposed method can be extended to an online framework (as discussed in Section 7). Apart from accuracy, and especially in high-frequency data, online change-point detection methods have to be very computationally efficient in order for users to act promptly. The computational complexity in the simple univariate setting is also crucial to understand extensions to practically meaningful adaptations of the algorithm to multivariate, possibly high-dimensional frameworks. Furthermore, an expansion of the method to the multiple change-point framework is discussed through an idea similar to that of moving sum (MOSUM; Eichinger & Kirch, 2018). It would be beneficial to the reader for the authors to justify this choice; is it due to MOSUM’s low computational complexity?