Data-centric curation pipelines frequently rely on model confidence scores to flag and filter noisy or mislabeled training instances. Evaluating this filtering convention on a large-scale consumer lending sample (LendingClub, N = 1,344,936) uncovers an underlying demographic asymmetry: high-income defaulters are disproportionately classified as label noise relative to low-income defaulters (Cramer's V approximately 0.03-0.07). Re-examining this behavior through the lens of equal opportunity [Hardt et al., 2016] reveals a far more severe discrepancy: a 16.86 percentage point gap in true positive rate (recall) between high- and low-income borrowers who ultimately defaulted. Implementing a sequential feature-blinding methodology allows us to isolate the drivers of this disparity across three distinct mechanisms: (1) direct reliance on self-reported applicant income; (2) algorithmic absorption of upstream institutional bias encoded within origination interest rates; and (3) a residual disparity (3.55 percentage points in cross-validation; 2.56 percentage points on a held-out test partition, Z = -4.04, p < 0.0001) that remains even after purging both income and interest rates from the model. Out-of-sample signed SHAP valuations demonstrate that this residual gap is maintained by structural proxies, most notably loan amount and home ownership status. These empirical findings show that simply blinding an algorithm to sensitive attributes fails to ensure fairness when institutional pricing decisions and behavioral proxy variables collectively reconstruct the omitted signals. We outline the practical implications of these findings for auditing data-centric AI workflows within regulated financial institutions.
Data quality profiling -- computing missing-value rates, duplicate fractions, outlier densities, and functional-dependency violations -- is foundational for data-centric AI pipelines, yet exhaustive scans over millions of rows are prohibitively slow for near-real-time monitoring. Progressive sampling is the standard alternative; the open question is which strategy best preserves profile fidelity at scale. We benchmark nine sampling strategies -- blind (random uniform, geometric, Yamane, cluster) and proxy-guided (Metropolis-Hastings, DAG, stratified by column type or quality score, importance-weighted) -- on three real-world datasets (NYC 311, NYPD arrests, UCI Adult; up to 500K rows), an IoT sensor stream (2.3M rows), two ultra-large real datasets including Ultra-Marathon Running (up to 7.4M rows), and synthetic data scaled to 5x10^6 rows. Contrary to the assumption sharpens estimates, blind representative samplers dominate uniformly. At a 5% budget, random uniform achieves 0.49% mean relative error on NYC 311; DAG-guided MCMC yields 19.5% (approx. 40x worse), and across all real datasets DAG is 11-49x worse (Wilcoxon W=0, p=0.002, n=9 pairs). Cluster sampling matches random uniform (MRE 0.110 vs. 0.111); proxy-guided methods share DAG's failure mode (MRE 0.20-0.35). At scale, random uniform is near-linear (O(N^{0.964})) while DAG is super-linear (O(N^{1.272})), running 28--47x slower on ultra-large data with 6x worse accuracy. The root cause is an IQR proxy mismatch: proxy-guided samplers over-pursue numeric outliers, while quality defects concentrate in categorical columns invisible to the proxy. The actionable finding: representativeness, not domain knowledge, determines sampler quality -- schema-free random uniform or cluster sampling suffices for production-grade quality profiling at scale.
Large-scale text corpora have become a quiet bottleneck in modern NLP, not just in storage, but in the accumulated cost of training, fine-tuning, and continual learning. We propose a text dataset distillation framework that reduces corpora to as little as 0.1% of their original size while preserving downstream task fidelity. We approach distillation through the lens of influence functions, which quantify each sample's contribution to the downstream objective, a natural and principled basis for selection. We introduce Trajectory-Aware Knowledge Estimation (TAKE), which convolves the knowledge-based influence along the training trajectory into a single per-sample knowledge score, capturing informative samples. These scores serve as sample weights within a discrete Optimal Transport objective, guiding prototype selection from a synthetically generated candidate pool. We evaluate TAKE on downstream accuracy across text classification and natural language inference tasks at extreme compression (0.1% or 20 samples/class), showing that data efficiency is achievable without sacrificing task fidelity. The approach is theoretically grounded, with broader implications for coreset construction and data-centric AI. We release our source code at https://github.com/votrinhan88/take.
Ha-Linh Nguyen, Hong-Anh Nguyen, Minh-Duc La +3cs.LG
The performance of machine learning and deep learning models largely depends on the quality of the training data. However, the quality of the real-world datasets is often compromised by noisy labels, which can substantially degrade model accuracy and reliability. To address this challenge, we propose Relabeler, an end-to-end data-centric framework for detecting and correcting corrupted labels. For corrupted label detection, Relabeler jointly leverages both local and global relationships among data instances to identify potentially noisy samples. After detecting suspicious instances, Relabeler further performs label correction by estimating the most probable clean label for each instance based on both its input features and observed noisy label. Extensive experiments across multiple datasets, noise types, and noise rates demonstrate that Relabeler consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, achieving up to 58% improvement in label correction precision and 6% improvement in downstream task performance.