Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Machine Learning typically assumes that training and test sets are independently drawn from the same distribution, but this assumption is often violated in practice which creates a bias. Many attempts to identify and mitigate this bias have been proposed, but they usually rely on ground-truth information. But what if the researcher is not even aware of the bias? In contrast to prior work, this paper introduces a new method, Imitate, to identify and mitigate Selection Bias in the case that we may not know if (and where) a bias is present, and hence no ground-truth information is available. Imitate investigates the dataset's probability density, then adds generated points in order to smooth out the density and have it resemble a Gaussian, the most common density occurring in real-world applications. If the artificial points focus on certain areas and are not widespread, this could indicate a Selection Bias where these areas are underrepresented in the sample. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method in both, synthetic and real-world datasets. We also point out limitations and future research directions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dost et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: