Behavioral Testing of ML Models (Unit tests for machine learning)

[@AICoffeeBreak]

This is a great topic! Thanks for presenting it so nicely! Well spoken and visualized! 💪

[@arp_ai]

Thank you Letitia!

[@manavmadan793]

Great Video, But using a small test set for QA should be done carefully as with time model can over-fit on those datasets.

[@bakrianoo]

مميز كالعادة. بالتوفيق يا رجل

[@katnoria]

Nicely explained Jay💯. I look forward to more of these

[@ramandutt3646]

This is a very interesting approach that can be extended to vision models as well!

[@arp_ai]

Absolutely!

[@saurabhatwipro]

Can same concepts be applied to supervised models .. like regression or classification models?

[@JourneyMindMap]

Good One. Thanks

[@SreeramAjay]

Your videos, contents and explanations are really good. Thanks for making quality content. It will be more nice, if you speak with same pitch as a start till the end of the sentence. Because words at the end of the sentences are low in volume. Thanks again for the great videos

[@haftamuhailu2516]

What a great presentation. Can I say Behavioral testing is somehow similar to Metamorphic testing in ML-Based Systems?

[@arhumz1573]

Jay, are you aware of any other code examples of these tests?

[@arp_ai]

The HATECHECK dataset present a test suite for hatespeech checking github.com/paul-rottger/hatecheck-data

[@af121x]

Thank you so much for the nice expanation.

[@VaibhavPatil-rx7pc]

Great master

[@jsnctl]

Really cool video Jay. Have you come across any equivalent approaches for tabular data?

[@arp_ai]

Not yet, but one should be able to devise tests from their domain knowledge

[@codeloki]

when you are really excited...

[@arp_ai]

X3 EXCITE!!

[@oosmanbeekawoo]

What should I get from this? That AI in Natural Language Processing is still in its infancy?? Have you heard about Duolingo. I need to know whether AI can successfully be implemented in Language Learning. It seems to me Duolingo corrects homework based on the order of the tiles. Gives you [boy] [am] [I] [a] (which he reads as [4] [2] [1] [3]. Just expects a correct order.) [I] [am] [a] [boy] >>[1] [2] [3] [4] That explains why (when it asks you to type) " I am a boy " is wrong but " I am a boy. " is correct! Just because of a dot! Sometimes it penalises FOR writing a dot. I'm guessing it checks the database for the exact sentence as opposed to language recognition.