Pranshu Malviya

MS Student at IIT Madras








Publications/Conference/Workshop Papers

TAG: Task-based Accumulated Gradients for Lifelong learning

P. Malviya, S. Chandar, B. Ravindran

Workshop on Theory and Foundation of Continual Learning, ICML

2021
Abstract: When an agent encounters a continual stream of new tasks in the lifelong learning setting, it leverages the knowledge it gained from the earlier tasks to help learn the new tasks better. In such a scenario, identifying an efficient knowledge representation becomes a challenging problem. Most research works propose to either store a subset of examples from the past tasks in a replay buffer, dedicate a separate set of parameters to each task or penalize excessive updates over parameters by introducing a regularization term. While existing methods employ the general task-agnostic stochastic gradient descent update rule, we propose a task-aware optimizer that adapts the learning rate based on the relatedness among tasks. We utilize the directions taken by the parameters during the updates by additively accumulating the gradients specific to each task. These task-based accumulated gradients act as a knowledge base that is maintained and updated throughout the stream. We empirically show that our proposed adaptive learning rate not only accounts for catastrophic forgetting but also exhibits knowledge transfer. We also show that our method performs better than several state-of-the-art methods in lifelong learning on complex datasets. Moreover, our method can also be combined with the existing methods and achieve substantial improvement in performance.

A Causal Approach for Unfair Edge Prioritization and Discrimination Removal

P. Ravishankar, P. Malviya, B. Ravindran

The 13th Asian Conference on Machine Learning (ACML)

2021
Abstract: In budget-constrained settings aimed at mitigating unfairness, like law enforcement, it is essential to prioritize the sources of unfairness before taking measures to mitigate them in the real world. Unlike previous works, which only serve as a caution against possible discrimination and de-bias data after data generation, this work provides a toolkit to mitigate unfairness in the real world. We assume that a non-parametric Markovian causal model representative of the data generation procedure is given. The edges emanating from the sensitive nodes in the causal graph, such as race, are assumed to be the sources of unfairness. We first quantify Edge Flow in any edge X –> Y, which is the belief of observing a specific value of Y due to the influence of a specific value of X along X –> Y. We then quantify Edge Unfairness by formulating a non-parametric model in terms of edge flows. We then prove that cumulative unfairness towards sensitive groups in a decision, like race in a bail decision, is non-existent when edge unfairness is absent. We prove this result for the non-trivial non-parametric model setting when the cumulative unfairness cannot be expressed in terms of edge unfairness. We then measure the Potential to mitigate the Cumulative Unfairness when edge unfairness is decreased. Based on these measurements, we propose the Unfair Edge Prioritization algorithm that can then be used by policymakers. We also propose the Discrimination Removal Procedure that de-biases a data distribution by eliminating optimization constraints that grow exponentially in the number of sensitive attributes and values taken by them. Extensive experiments validate the theorem and specifications used for quantifying the above measures.

A Causal Linear Model to Quantify Edge and Cumulative Unfairness for Unfair Edge Prioritization and Discrimination Removal

P. Ravishankar, P. Malviya, B. Ravindran

Workshop on Law and Machine Learning, ICML

2020
Abstract: The dataset can be generated by an unfair mechanism in numerous settings. For instance, a judicial system is unfair if it rejects the bail plea of an accused based on the race. To mitigate the unfairness in the procedure generating the dataset, we need to identify the sources of unfairness, quantify the unfairness in these sources, quantify how these sources affect the overall unfairness, and prioritize the sources before addressing the real-world issues underlying them. Prior work of Zhang et al. 2017 identifies and removes discrimination after data is generated but does not suggest a methodology to mitigate unfairness in the data generation phase. We use the notion of an unfair edge, same as Chiappa et al. 2018, to be a source of discrimination and quantify unfairness along an unfair edge. We also quantify overall unfairness in a particular decision towards a subset of sensitive attributes in terms of edge unfairness and measure the sensitivity of the former when the latter is varied. Using the formulation of cumulative unfairness in terms of edge unfairness, we alter the discrimination removal methodology discussed in Zhang et al. 2017 by not formulating it as an optimization problem. This helps in getting rid of constraints that grow exponentially in the number of sensitive attributes and values taken by them. Finally, we discuss a priority algorithm for policymakers to address the real-world issues underlying the edges that result in unfairness. The experimental section validates the linear model assumption made to quantify edge unfairness.

Contextual Care Protocol using Neural Networks and Decision Trees

Y. P. Sinha, P. Malviya, M. Panda, S. M. Ali

Second International Conference on Advances in Electronics, Computer and Communications (IEEE Xplore)

2018
Abstract: A contextual care protocol is used by a medical practitioner for patient healthcare, given the context or situation that the specified patient is in. This paper proposes a method to build an automated self-adapting protocol which can help make relevant, early decisions for effective healthcare delivery. The hybrid model leverages neural networks and decision trees. The neural network estimates the chances of each disease and each tree in the decision trees represents care protocol for a disease. These trees are subject to change in case of aberrations found by the diagnosticians. These corrections or prediction errors are clustered into similar groups for scalability and review by the experts. The corrections as suggested by the experts are incorporated into the model.