ML Model Performance Evaluation and Recommendation System

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current machine learning model performance evaluation lacks automated and proactive methods for identifying improvement opportunities, relying on manual expert consultations only when significant issues arise, making it difficult for customers to enhance model performance effectively.

Innovation Solution

A method that evaluates multiple performance metrics for machine learning models, computes aggregated performance scores, and recommends modifications based on weighted improvements from other implementations, providing customers with actionable insights to enhance model performance.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual expert consultations are used to evaluate machine learning model performance, then expert knowledge can be applied to identify issues, but the process is reactive and time-consuming, only occurring when significant issues arise

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemodel performance evaluation reliabilityVSAvoidtime for performance evaluation
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables machine learning models to self-evaluate their own performance by automatically computing performance scores from multiple metrics and generating improvement recommendations without requiring external expert intervention, thus resolving the contradiction between reliable evaluation and time loss

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements continuous automated feedback loops that monitor performance metrics, compute scores, and generate recommendations in real-time, transforming the reactive manual consultation process into a proactive automated system that maintains reliability while eliminating time delays

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Productivity

If multiple performance metrics are evaluated and aggregated into performance scores with recommendations, then proactive performance improvement opportunities can be identified, but the system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveperformance improvement identification efficiencyVSAvoidevaluation system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments performance evaluation into distinct components: multiple specific performance metrics, aggregated performance scores for different categories, and targeted recommendations, making the complex evaluation process manageable and systematic while improving productivity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system transforms qualitative model performance into quantitative measurements by defining specific performance metrics and computing aggregated scores, converting complex evaluation into parameter-based calculations that improve efficiency while maintaining systematic complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Measurement precision

If performance metrics are weighted based on expected improvement from other implementations, then more accurate improvement recommendations can be provided, but the computation complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveperformance score accuracyVSAvoidscoring system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary actions by pre-defining performance metrics, weighting schemes, and aggregation methods based on expected improvements from other implementations, so that when evaluation is needed, the complex computation has already been prepared and structured

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses performance data from other implementations as templates or copies to determine appropriate weights and metrics for current evaluation, leveraging proven configurations to achieve accurate scoring without re-inventing the evaluation framework

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Data Source

PatentUS11625626B2Performance improvement recommendations for machine learning models
Publication Date: 2023.04.11 RSA SECURITY INC
  • US11625626B2 patent drawing
  • US11625626B2 patent drawing
  • US11625626B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Techniques are provided for generating performance improvement recommendations for machine learning models. One method comprises evaluating performance metrics for multiple implementations of a machine learning model; computing a performance score that aggregates the performance metrics for a given machine learning model implementation; and recommending a modification to the given machine learning model implementation based on the performance score by evaluating one or more performance metrics for the given implementation relative to at least one additional performance metric for the given implementation, wherein the recommended modification is based on a performance with the recommended modification for another implementation. A given performance metric may be weighted based on an expected improvement from modifying a factor related to the given performance metric. The recommended modification to the given machine learning model implementation may comprise an indication of the expected improvement for the modification.