1 / 30

Network A/B Testing: From Sampling to Estimation

Network A/B Testing: From Sampling to Estimation. Ya Xu ‡ Joint work with Huan Gui † Anmol Bhasin ‡ Jiawei Han † † University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana ‡ LinkedIn Corporation. introduction. A/B Testing. Uniformly Random Control Treatment Average Treatment Effect.

kelly-frye
Télécharger la présentation

Network A/B Testing: From Sampling to Estimation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Network A/B Testing: From Sampling to Estimation YaXu‡ Joint work with HuanGui†AnmolBhasin‡Jiawei Han† † University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana ‡LinkedIn Corporation

  2. introduction

  3. A/B Testing • Uniformly Random • Control • Treatment • Average Treatment Effect

  4. Assumption A/B Testing – Two parallel universes • Two parallel universes Parallel Universe 1 (control, ) Parallel Universe 2 (treatment, ) Real World (Observations, )

  5. Network A/B Testing Interactions between nodes in networks

  6. Examples • Experiment on feed ranking algorithms • Treatment feed algorithm ranks more relevant items higher • Adam(treatment) clicks on a feed update(X) • X shows up higher for Adam’s friend Ben (control) • Ben (control) clicks on X • Experiment on People You May Know recommendations • …

  7. Assumption: SUTVA • SUTVA (Stable Unit Treatment Value Assumption) • Treatment Assignment Vector • Response function • Each individual’s response is affected only by their own treatment assignments.

  8. Network A/B Testing Framework

  9. Framework • Experimental Design • Randomize assignment to minimize interactions • Experimental Analysis • Adjust for network effect post experiment

  10. Experimental Design • Partition the network/graph • Randomize atcluster level Minimize the links between clusters Minimize the interactions between treatment and control • Minimize information leakage • Smaller bias for ATE

  11. Balanced Graph Partition • If the cluster sizes are the same for all clusters • No matter what users’ responses are, the covariance is zero, leading to non-biased estimator. See Middleton and Aronow 2011 for derivation

  12. Clustering Real Network Heterogeneous & large scale (350MM+) An employee network from LinkedIn 3-net clustering (Ugander et. al.,KDD’13)

  13. Randomized Balanced Graph Partition • Random Shuffling on Label Propagation • Randomly initialize clusters (equal size) • Select two nodes and swap their labels if it results in fewer edges between clusters. • Randomly Shuffle x% of labels • Repeat until convergence. Break local optimal

  14. Clustering Results • Network Statistics • Edges # within each clusters RSLP can be easily distributed as Label Propagation Algorithm, while achieves comparable performance as Modularity Maximization.

  15. Experimental Analysis • Exposure Models • SUTVA • Neighborhood Exposure (Ugander et. al., KDD’13) • Definition: i is neighborhood exposed to treatment if (1) i is in treatment, and (2) At least θ% of i’s neighbors are in treatment • Assumption: i’s response under neighborhood exposure is the same as if everyone receives treatment.

  16. Bias-Variance Tradeoff About 80% of data points would be invalid (high variance) θ= 0.9 • Stronger assumption • Yi(θ=0.3) = Yi(θ= 1) • (large bias) θ= 0.3

  17. Fraction Neighborhood Exposure • Users’ responses are determined by • the treatment assignment • the fraction of neighbors having the same treatment assignment. E.g., Additive Models can be arbitrary function

  18. Example • Additive Model I • ATE

  19. Example • Additive Model II • ATE

  20. Simulations & real experiments

  21. Simulations • Real network graph • Generation model (Eckles et al. 2014) • Compare bias & variance of five estimators

  22. Increasing treatment% Increasing treatment% Bias Variance

  23. Increasing Network Effect Increasing Network Effect Bias Variance

  24. Real Online Experiment • Select a country • Apply randomized balanced graph partitioning to assign treatment/control • Apply two Feed ranking algorithms to treatment/control • Estimate ATE using various approaches

  25. Real Online Experiment • Picked Netherlands • 600 clusters  300/300 in treatment/control • Conducted A/A test to ensure no bias

  26. Real Online Experiments Results

  27. Key Takeaways • Network effect in A/B Testing • Experimental Design: Balanced Graph Partition • Experimental Analysis: Fraction Neighborhood Exposure Model • Experiments • Simulation • Real Online Experiments • Lots of future work!

  28. Percentage of Units in Treatment • The distribution of changes with percentage of units in treatment. is not representative.

  29. Graph Cluster Randomization (Ugander et. al., KDD’13) • Partition the social network • How to cluster? Any constraints? • Randomization on the cluster level • Users in the same cluster receive the same treatment assignment (treatment/control). • Estimate Average Treatment Effect • Any assumptions?

More Related