arXiv preprint ·
Differential Refresh Policies for Models Trained on Lagging Data Snapshots: From a Single-Age Equivalence Limit to an Optimal Per-Segment Allocation
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Published in
- arXiv
- DOI
- 10.48550/arxiv.2610.09519
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Cited by
- 0 works, as OpenAlex counts them
- Topics
Abstract
Production machine-learning models are derived artifacts of time-bounded training snapshots: a deployed model is a materialized view over a training cut that ages the instant it is built. A common response is to replace the fixed retraining cadence with an adaptive trigger -- a weighted staleness score that retrains when accumulated source risk crosses a threshold. We show this is the wrong lever, and identify the right one. First, an equivalence limit: any refresh trigger that is a static, strictly monotone function of a single shared global training-data age is operationally equivalent to a calibrated uniform age timer, so a global staleness budget, however elaborately it weights segments, sources, and sensitivities, carries no scheduling information a clock does not. The limit also shows how to escape it: refresh segments differentially, giving each its own age and refresh interval, which is meaningful when refresh cost is separable across segments (incremental training or per-segment models). We solve the resulting budget-allocation problem. In the frequent-refresh regime each segment's optimal refresh rate is proportional to the square root of its risk $w_j λ_j$ (weight times change rate), and the optimal policy never costs more than the uniform timer, beating it by a closed-form Cauchy-Schwarz "price of uniformity" that is zero for homogeneous workloads and grows with heterogeneity. In a discrete-event simulation with real Poisson change events, the optimal policy lowers realized weighted stale exposure by 8-29% relative to the uniform timer at matched refresh budget, winning on 86-100% of seeds; a naive exposure-threshold policy does not, showing the allocation is what helps; and the advantage survives 50% rate-estimation noise. The leverage in model refresh is not a better score but a better action.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Machine Learning
Expert Coupling in MoE Pretraining: Reducing All-to-All Overhead with Correlated Placement and Token Shuffling
PageWeaver: KV-Guided Query Unions for Sparse Attention
Democratizing MoE inference on commodity GPUs with CoMoE
NosRacer: Dynamic Detection of Race Conditions in On-Device Network Operating Systems
Equal-Budget Monte Carlo Tree Search versus Randomized-Restart List Scheduling for DAG Workflows: A Controlled Equal-Budget Computational Study
Get the few papers worth your time in Machine Learning every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.