[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/3269206.3271747acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescikmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Trustworthy Experimentation Under Telemetry Loss

Published: 17 October 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Failure to accurately measure the outcomes of an experiment can lead to bias and incorrect conclusions. Online controlled experiments (aka AB tests) are increasingly being used to make decisions to improve websites as well as mobile and desktop applications. We argue that loss of telemetry data (during upload or post-processing) can skew the results of experiments, leading to loss of statistical power and inaccurate or erroneous conclusions. By systematically investigating the causes of telemetry loss, we argue that it is not practical to entirely eliminate it. Consequently, experimentation systems need to be robust to its effects. Furthermore, we note that it is nontrivial to measure the absolute level of telemetry loss in an experimentation system. In this paper, we take a top-down approach towards solving this problem. We motivate the impact of loss qualitatively using experiments in real applications deployed at scale, and formalize the problem by presenting a theoretical breakdown of the bias introduced by loss. Based on this foundation, we present a general framework for quantitatively evaluating the impact of telemetry loss, and present two solutions to measure the absolute levels of loss. This framework is used by well-known applications at Microsoft, with millions of users and billions of sessions. These general principles can be adopted by any application to improve the overall trustworthiness of experimentation and data-driven decision making.

References

[1]
Fabio Celli et almbox. 2016. Predicting Brexit: Classifying agreement is better than sentiment and pollsters. In Proc. Workshop on Computational Modeling of People's Opinions, Personality, and Emotions in Social Media .
[2]
Ronnie Chaiken et almbox. 2008. SCOPE: easy and efficient parallel processing of massive data sets. Proc. VLDB Endowment, Vol. 1, 2 (2008).
[3]
Alex Deng et almbox. 2013. Improving the Sensitivity of Online Controlled Experiments by Utilizing Pre-Experiment Data. In Proc. Conference on Web Search and Data Mining .
[4]
Pavel Dmitriev et almbox. 2017a. A/B Testing at Scale: Accelerating Software Innovation. In Proc. ACM KDD '17 .
[5]
Pavel Dmitriev et almbox. 2017b. A Dirty Dozen: Twelve Common Metric Interpretation Pitfalls in Online Controlled Experiments. In Proc. ACM KDD '18 .
[6]
Aleksander Fabijan et almbox. 2017. The Benefits of Controlled Experimentation at Scale. In Proc. Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Analytics .
[7]
Jim Gray et almbox. 1996. The dangers of replication and a solution. ACM SIGMOD Record, Vol. 25, 2 (1996).
[8]
Kosuke Imai. 2009. Statistical analysis of randomized experiments with non-ignorable missing binary outcomes: an application to a voting experiment. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), Vol. 58, 1 (2009).
[9]
Junchen Jiang et almbox. 2016. Via: Improving internet telephony call quality using predictive relay selection. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM '16 .
[10]
Scott Keeter. 2006. The impact of cell phone noncoverage bias on polling in the 2004 presidential election. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 70, 1 (2006).
[11]
Ron Kohavi et almbox. 2009. Controlled experiments on the web: survey and practical guide. In Proc. ACM KDD '09 .
[12]
Ron Kohavi et almbox. 2013. Seven Rules of Thumb for Web Site Experimenters. In Proc. ACM KDD '13 .
[13]
Ron Kohavi and Stefan Thomke. 2017. The surprising power of online experiments. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 95, 5 (2017).
[14]
Adam Langley et almbox. 2017. The QUIC transport protocol: Design and Internet-scale deployment. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM '17 .
[15]
Roderick JA Little and Donald B Rubin. 2014. Statistical analysis with missing data . Vol. 333. John Wiley & Sons.
[16]
Francesca Molinari. 2010. Missing Treatments. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, Vol. 28, 1 (2010).
[17]
Douglas C. Montgomery. 2008. Design and Analysis of Experiments .John Wiley & Sons.
[18]
H Schulzrinne et almbox. 2003. RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications . Internet RFCs, Vol. RFC 3550 (2003).
[19]
Diane Tang et almbox. 2010. Overlapping experiment infrastructure: More, better, faster experimentation. In Proc. ACM KDD '10 .
[20]
Ashish Thusoo et almbox. 2009. Hive: a warehousing solution over a map-reduce framework. Proc. VLDB Endowment, Vol. 2, 2 (2009).
[21]
Matthias Wiesmann et almbox. 2000. Database replication techniques: A three parameter classification. In Proc. IEEE Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems .
[22]
Ya Xu et almbox. 2015. From infrastructure to culture: A/B testing challenges in large scale social networks. In Proc. ACM KDD '15 .
[23]
Ya Xu and Nanyu Chen. 2016. Evaluating Mobile Apps with A/B and Quasi A/B Tests. In Proc. ACM KDD '16 .

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)A/B testingJournal of Systems and Software10.1016/j.jss.2024.112011211:COnline publication date: 2-Jul-2024
  • (2021)The cosmos big data platform at MicrosoftProceedings of the VLDB Endowment10.14778/3476311.347639014:12(3148-3161)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2021
  • (2019)Challenges, Best Practices and Pitfalls in Evaluating Results of Online Controlled ExperimentsProceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining10.1145/3292500.3332297(3189-3190)Online publication date: 25-Jul-2019
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
CIKM '18: Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management
October 2018
2362 pages
ISBN:9781450360142
DOI:10.1145/3269206
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 17 October 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. ab testing
  2. client experimentation
  3. data loss
  4. experimentation trustworthiness
  5. online controlled experiments
  6. telemetry loss

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

CIKM '18
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

CIKM '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 147 of 826 submissions, 18%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,861 of 8,427 submissions, 22%

Upcoming Conference

CIKM '25

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)12
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 03 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)A/B testingJournal of Systems and Software10.1016/j.jss.2024.112011211:COnline publication date: 2-Jul-2024
  • (2021)The cosmos big data platform at MicrosoftProceedings of the VLDB Endowment10.14778/3476311.347639014:12(3148-3161)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2021
  • (2019)Challenges, Best Practices and Pitfalls in Evaluating Results of Online Controlled ExperimentsProceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining10.1145/3292500.3332297(3189-3190)Online publication date: 25-Jul-2019
  • (2019)Diagnosing Sample Ratio Mismatch in Online Controlled ExperimentsProceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining10.1145/3292500.3330722(2156-2164)Online publication date: 25-Jul-2019
  • (2019)Experimentation in the operating systemProceedings of the 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice10.1109/ICSE-SEIP.2019.00011(21-30)Online publication date: 27-May-2019
  • (2019)Three key checklists and remedies for trustworthy analysis of online controlled experiments at scaleProceedings of the 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice10.1109/ICSE-SEIP.2019.00009(1-10)Online publication date: 27-May-2019
  • (2019)A Framework for Tunable Anomaly Detection2019 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA)10.1109/ICSA.2019.00029(201-210)Online publication date: Mar-2019

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media