Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Naggita, Keziah, LaChance, Julienne
Formato: Preprint
Publicado: 2025
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.23349
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
_version_ 1866915417441697792
author Naggita, Keziah
LaChance, Julienne
author_facet Naggita, Keziah
LaChance, Julienne
contents Following the rise in popularity of data-centric machine learning (ML), various data valuation methods have been proposed to quantify the contribution of each datapoint to desired ML model performance metrics (e.g., accuracy). Beyond the technical applications of data valuation methods (e.g., data cleaning, data acquisition, etc.), it has been suggested that within the context of data markets, data buyers might utilize such methods to fairly compensate data owners. Here we demonstrate that data valuation metrics are inherently biased and unstable under simple algorithmic design choices, resulting in both technical and ethical implications. By analyzing 9 tabular classification datasets and 6 data valuation methods, we illustrate how (1) common and inexpensive data pre-processing techniques can drastically alter estimated data values; (2) subsampling via data valuation metrics may increase class imbalance; and (3) data valuation metrics may undervalue underrepresented group data. Consequently, we argue in favor of increased transparency associated with data valuation in-the-wild and introduce the novel Data Valuation Cards (DValCards) framework towards this aim. The proliferation of DValCards will reduce misuse of data valuation metrics, including in data pricing, and build trust in responsible ML systems.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2506_23349
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle A case for data valuation transparency via DValCards
Naggita, Keziah
LaChance, Julienne
Machine Learning
Following the rise in popularity of data-centric machine learning (ML), various data valuation methods have been proposed to quantify the contribution of each datapoint to desired ML model performance metrics (e.g., accuracy). Beyond the technical applications of data valuation methods (e.g., data cleaning, data acquisition, etc.), it has been suggested that within the context of data markets, data buyers might utilize such methods to fairly compensate data owners. Here we demonstrate that data valuation metrics are inherently biased and unstable under simple algorithmic design choices, resulting in both technical and ethical implications. By analyzing 9 tabular classification datasets and 6 data valuation methods, we illustrate how (1) common and inexpensive data pre-processing techniques can drastically alter estimated data values; (2) subsampling via data valuation metrics may increase class imbalance; and (3) data valuation metrics may undervalue underrepresented group data. Consequently, we argue in favor of increased transparency associated with data valuation in-the-wild and introduce the novel Data Valuation Cards (DValCards) framework towards this aim. The proliferation of DValCards will reduce misuse of data valuation metrics, including in data pricing, and build trust in responsible ML systems.
title A case for data valuation transparency via DValCards
topic Machine Learning
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.23349