Class-conditional domain adaptation for semantic segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Semantic segmentation is an important sub-task for many applications. However, pixel-level ground-truth labeling is costly, and there is a tendency to overfit to training data, thereby limiting the generalization ability. Unsupervised domain adaptation can potentially address these problems by allowing systems trained on labelled datasets from the source domain (including less expensive synthetic domain) to be adapted to a novel target domain. The conventional approach involves automatic extraction and alignment of the representations of source and target domains globally. One limitation of this approach is that it tends to neglect the differences between classes: representations of certain classes can be more easily extracted and aligned between the source and target domains than others, limiting the adaptation over all classes. Here, we address this problem by introducing a Class-Conditional Domain Adaptation (CCDA) method. This incorporates a class-conditional multi-scale discriminator and class-conditional losses for both segmentation and adaptation. Together, they measure the segmentation, shift the domain in a class-conditional manner, and equalize the loss over classes. Experimental results demonstrate that the performance of our CCDA method matches, and in some cases, surpasses that of state-of-the-art methods.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".