When the Quick Fix Goes Wrong: The Dark Side of Auto-ML

Data science is a field that is growing fast, and technology is evolving even faster. In the past few years, Automated Machine Learning - better known as Auto-ML - has been gaining a lot of traction. As a result, the demand for data science skills has skyrocketed, with many organizations scrambling to find and train talent to fill data science positions. If you're a non-data scientist trying to work with complex data sets or programs, you might think that Auto-ML is the answer to all of your problems. After all, it promises to automate a lot of the tedious work involved in building, testing and deploying machine learning applications, all without having to rely on (or pay for) a team of dedicated data scientists. With the rise of Auto-ML, non-data scientists can now leverage machine learning models without having to understand the underlying algorithms. While Auto-ML may seem like a shortcut to creating machine learning models, the resulting tools can often be flawed, biased, or useless. But as with any shortcut, there are risks and tradeoffs involved in using auto-ML tools, and it's important to understand these before racing headlong into a project. In this article, we'll explore the risks of Auto-ML tools and how organizations can minimize them.

The Risks of Auto-ML

Auto-ML can be risky. Auto-ML algorithms are designed to automate the entire machine learning process, from data preprocessing to model selection and tuning. Without a deep understanding of machine learning concepts, it can be tempting for non-data scientists to rely solely on Auto-ML tools to create models. However, it’s essential to understand that Auto-ML is not a one-stop-shop for data analysis. It does not eliminate the need for skilled data scientists who can not only interpret results but also understand the data’s context. The models created by Auto-ML may have - and most likely will - unnoticed biases, leading to flawed or skewed results. It is crucial to ensure that the data being used for modeling is thoroughly evaluated and validated before even proceeding to the next step

For instance, suppose an Auto-ML tool is trained on a dataset that is mostly composed of men. In that case, the resulting model may not perform well for data sets with more women, since it was not trained on a diverse enough dataset. Furthermore, Auto-ML tools can often overfit the data, resulting in models that perform well on the training data but poorly on new data.

Another challenge that arises when using Auto-ML is the lack of interpretability of the models. In an era where regulations are stricter than ever on data privacy issues, it is becoming more of a challenge to explain why a model came up with certain results, how it arrived at an output or any potential biases present. It is crucial to ensure that applications of this method are used with skeptical eyes towards the output predictions. Simple implementations like effective model explanation, robustness and complexity estimation, and model selection techniques can be taken to improve transparency and interpretability.

Moreover, it’s crucial to note that the process between data input and output by Auto-ML can sometimes be challenging to automate. Some data may require pre-processing or custom feature engineering, which Auto-ML does not provide by default. Non-data scientists can unknowingly train ineffable models that may work well only with the test data, a great term called overfitting. This also brings up the point of evaluation outside of training and validation datasets. Building multiple diverse models with Auto-ML might result in analytically rich predictions that improve the overall quality of predictions made by organizations.

Lastly, data privacy and accountability are two of the most critical aspects that data scientists need to keep in mind when using Auto-ML. For instance, ethical violations or long-term negative social consequences can result from either making inaccurate projections or rampant sharing of an individual or group's data. A transparent and vocal security-first approach towards the implementation of Auto-ML can help account for the bias and model interpretative challenges.

Optimizing Citizen Data Science

Despite the risks associated with Auto-ML, government agencies can take steps to optimize the use of citizen data scientists. One effective strategy is to establish guidelines and best practices for the responsible use of Auto-ML tools. This could include training programs that educate non-data scientists on the limitations and risks of Auto-ML and encourage transparency and explainability in model building.

Another important step is to establish a governance framework for Auto-ML. This framework should cover areas such as data quality, privacy, and security, ensuring that the data used to train the models is ethical and unbiased.

In addition to governance, agencies can also take advantage of specialized tools to help mitigate the risks associated with Auto-ML. For example, Explainable AI tools can help identify sources of bias in models and create understandable and explainable models that stakeholders can trust.

Auto-ML tools can be enticing for non-data scientists who do not have a deep understanding of machine learning concepts. However, while they can be a helpful tool in the data science toolbox, they can produce flawed, biased, or useless models. Government agencies that want to take advantage of citizen data scientists should establish guidelines and best practices for Auto-ML, use specialized tools like Explainable AI, and establish a governance framework to ensure ethical and unbiased data use. By doing so, agencies can minimize the risks of Auto-ML and optimize the use of citizen data scientists.

Data No Doubt! Check out WSDALearning.ai and start learning Data Analytics and Data Science Today!