How Faithful Is Trajectory-Based Data Attribution? Error Sources, Remedies, and Practical Guidelines

arXiv cs.LG Papers
data-attribution influence-estimation error-analysis model-interpretability optimizer-mismatch machine-learning

Summary

This paper provides the first systematic analysis of error sources in trajectory-based data attribution methods, identifies optimizer mismatch as the dominant error, proposes AdamW-influence to address it, and offers practical guidelines for data selection via a K-step look-ahead framework.

arXiv:2605.18814v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Trajectory-based data attribution methods estimate the influence of training samples on model predictions by unrolling the training trajectory. They are widely used in applications such as data selection, data valuation, and model diagnosis, but there is a lack of comprehensive error analysis of these methods, raising concerns about method faithfulness and hindering reliable deployment. In this work, we provide the first systematic analysis of error sources in trajectory-based data attribution, together with concrete remedies to mitigate them and practical guidelines for downstream use. We organize the total error into three categories, config-level, algorithm-level, and system-level. We make three contributions. First, we identify optimizer mismatch as the dominant config-level error: existing methods derive their attribution under the assumption of SGD, even for models trained with the modern de facto optimizer AdamW. We propose AdamW-influence to fully account for AdamW's optimization dynamics, yielding improvements from 10% to over 300% in Spearman correlation between estimated and ground-truth influence across four settings spanning MLP, CNN, GPT-2, and Llama 3.2-1B. Second, we isolate the remaining algorithm-level error arising from the first-order Taylor approximation, identify the learning rate and trajectory length as factors governing the error magnitude, and derive a closed-form error proxy that can be evaluated along the original trajectory without retraining. Third, we translate these insights into practical guidelines for data selection by unifying offline and online strategies under a K-step look-ahead framework. Under this framework, online selection with a short horizon often matches or exceeds offline, and the optimal horizon can be tuned jointly with the learning rate. Together, these results turn the framework into an actionable selection recipe for practitioners.
Original Article

Similar Articles

Long-Horizon Agent Trajectory Attribution: A Unified Benchmark and Fine-Grained Annotation Framework

arXiv cs.AI

This paper introduces a unified benchmark and fine-grained annotation framework for long-horizon agent trajectory attribution, enabling evaluation of primary attribution localization and attribution-chain recovery across diverse settings. It provides over 1,300 annotated trajectories from existing agent benchmarks and releases a reusable annotation skill for standardizing future trajectories.

Conformal Agent Error Attribution

arXiv cs.LG

This paper presents a framework for error attribution in multi-agent systems using conformal prediction, providing statistical guarantees for identifying decisive errors in agent trajectories. The approach enables automated recovery and debugging by isolating errors within contiguous prediction sets.

Offline Preference-Based Trajectory Evaluation

arXiv cs.LG

This paper proposes offline preference-based trajectory evaluation for agentic systems, which compares trajectories via temporal preferences rather than binary success metrics. It shows that this approach reduces ties from roughly 75% to 35%, improving discriminative power and data efficiency across diverse benchmarks.