Between-Class Learning for Image Classification
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose a novel learning method for image classification called Between-Class learning (BC learning)1. We generate between-class images by mixing two images belonging to different classes with a random ratio. We then input the mixed image to the model and train the model to output the mixing ratio. BC learning has the ability to impose constraints on the shape of the feature distributions, and thus the generalization ability is improved. BC learning is originally a method developed for sounds, which can be digitally mixed. Mixing two image data does not appear to make sense; however, we argue that because convolutional neural networks have an aspect of treating input data as waveforms, what works on sounds must also work on images. First, we propose a simple mixing method using internal divisions, which surprisingly proves to significantly improve performance. Second, we propose a mixing method that treats the images as waveforms, which leads to a further improvement in performance. As a result, we achieved 19.4% and 2.26% top-1 errors on ImageNet-1K and CIFAR10, respectively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it