Kisaco Leadership Chart on Enterprise ML Lifecycle Solutions 2020-21

Motivation

What you will learn

• The makeup of the machine learning (ML) software solution space, how the market segments itself into available products.
• The makeup ML lifecycle solutions: what these solutions encompass and provide.
• The Kisaco Leadership Chart (KLC) on the participating vendors: positions the solutions in the chart. We also provide an overview of the solution characteristics in terms of aggregated performance scores in a heapmap.
• Deep profiles of six of our participating vendors competing in ML lifecycle solutions, including strengths and weaknesses.
• Analysis of the roles required to use ML lifecycle solutions and the levels of expertise required.

Contents

Kisaco Research View. 2

Motivation. 2

Note: How we define AI 2

Key findings. 2

Solution Analysis: ML lifecycle. 3

Essential concepts for managing the ML lifecycle. 3

The ML disciplines. 3

The ML team roles. 5

The ML lifecycle and market solutions. 5

The broader competitive landscape. 8

Solution analysis: vendor comparisons. 8

Kisaco Leadership Chart on ML Lifecycle Solutions 2020-21. 8

ML lifecycle solution vendor comparisons. 8

The KLC chart for ML lifecycle solutions. 9

Vendor analysis. 11

Algorithmia, Kisaco evaluation: Leader 11

Kisaco Assessment 13

DataKitchen, Kisaco evaluation: Emerging Player 13

Kisaco Assessment 15

dotData, Kisaco evaluation: Emerging Player 16

Kisaco Assessment 18

Iguazio, Kisaco evaluation: Leader 19

Kisaco Assessment 21

Spell, Kisaco evaluation: Emerging Player 22

Kisaco Assessment 24

Splice Machine, Kisaco evaluation: Innovator 24

Kisaco Assessment 26

Appendix. 27

Vendor solution selection. 27

Inclusion criteria. 27

Exclusion criteria. 28

Methodology. 28

Definition of the KLC. 28

Kisaco Research ratings. 28

Further reading. 29

Acknowledgements. 29

Author 29

Kisaco Research Analysis Network. 29

Copyright notice and disclaimer 29

Figures

Figure 1: The space of ML spans AI, computing, and data science.

Figure 2: ML application code is a small part of the infrastructure required to build and run ML.

Figure 3: ML lifecycle in the ML tool eco-system (covering DataOps, AutoML, MLOps).

Figure 4: Components of a ML lifecycle solution.

Figure 5: Heat map analysis of participating vendor solution features.

Figure 6: Kisaco Leadership Chart on ML lifecycle solutions 2020-21.

Figure 7: Kisaco Leadership Chart on ML lifecycle solutions 2020-21: ranking of vendors.

Figure 8: Algorithmia Enterprise architecture.

Figure 9: DataKitchen DataOps Platform: orchestrate data to customer value.

Figure 10: Feature engineering is a key set of activities for ML development.

Figure 11: Three dotData deployment methods.

Figure 12: Iguazio Data Science as a Platform architecture.

Figure 13: The Spell MLOps solution.

Figure 14: Splice Machine architecture: product offerings in blue.

FAQs

1.  What is the KLC?

The Kisaco Leadership Chart (KLC) is KR Analysis’s take on the classis industry analyst chart in which vendor products are assessed and their scores plotted on a chart comprising four quadrants: Leader, Contender, Innovator, and Emerging Player. The x-axis represents strength of technical features, the y-axis the strength of market execution and strategy, and the size of plotted circle represents market revenue normalized to the strongest participating player in the research.

In researching the KLC we receive privileged information from a vendor. As explained in question 3, participating vendors are actively engaged in our research. Confidential privileged vendor information is not disclosed in our report but helps us assess vendors in our analysis.

2. What is the vendor selection process for a KLC project?

KR Analysis creates a shortlist of vendors to invite to the research project. The aim is to include the leading players as well as innovative smaller players, across startup and established vendors. KLC research can at best be representative of the market and is not designed to be exhaustive – in some markets the sheer number of players would make an exhaustive KLC unmanageable, in smaller markets we are still dependent on vendors agreeing to participate.

We do create KR Analysis Technology and Market Landscape reports in which we typically list the players in the markets with thumbnail profiles providing information such as company leadership, location, funding status, and main product(s) details. While we cannot guarantee exhaustiveness, the landscape report does aim to list the most important vendors and does not require vendor participation.

3. In a KLC, what does participating entail for a vendor?

First of all, we do not charge vendors to participate in a KLC. Participating vendors need to be actively engaged in a KLC research project, this involves completing a comprehensive questionnaire, which we score and use as the basis for positioning the vendor in the report’s KLC. We also hold a deep dive briefing and engage in plenty of Q&A. Finally, we research publicly available material on the vendor and its product(s) to complete our final view of the vendor. 

4. Why are some notable vendors missing from the report?

As explained in question 2, we do invite the leaders in a market segment we are researching, however not all such players agree to participate. As explained in question 3, participating involves active engagement and example reasons vendors offer for declining our invitation are, often ending with “...but please consider us next cycle of the report.”:

• We are in the midst of an event in which our relevant staff do not have the time to engage in your process.
• We are going through a major change in strategy or product re-architecture and the timing is not right for us to participate.
• We are about to have our IPO and this is not the right time to participate.
• We are about to launch our flagship product and the report timing is not right for us.