MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107092601 · doi:10.1109/access.2020.3041873

DCBT-Net: Training Deep Convolutional Neural Networks With Extremely Noisy Labels

2020· article· en· W3107092601 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bekhzod Olimov, Jeonghong Kim, Anand Paul

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational IT Industry Promotion AgencyKyungpook National UniversityNational Research Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceTraining (meteorology)Net (polyhedron)Machine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Speech recognitionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obtaining data with correct labels is crucial to attain the state-of-the-art performance of Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) models. However, labeling datasets is significantly time-consuming and expensive process because it requires expert knowledge in a particular domain. Therefore, real-life datasets often exhibit incorrect labels due to the involvement of nonexperts in the data-labeling process. Consequently, there are many cases of incorrectly labeled data in the wild. Although the issue of poorly labeled datasets has been studied, the existing methods are complex and difficult to reproduce. Thus, in this study, we proposed a simpler algorithm called “Deep Clean Before Training Net” (DCBT-Net) that is based on cleaning wrongly labeled data points using the information from eigenvalues of the Laplacian matrix obtained from similarities between the data samples. The cleaned data were trained using deep CNN (DCNN) to attain the state-of-the-art results. This system achieved better performance than the existing approaches. In conducted experiments, the performance of the DCBT-Net was tested on three commercially available datasets, namely, Modified National Institute of Standards and Technology (MNIST) database of handwritten digits, Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR) and WebVision1000 datasets. The proposed method achieved better results when assessed using several evaluation metrics compared with the existing state-of-the-art methods. Specifically, the DCBT-Net attained an average 15%, 20%, and 3% increase in accuracy score using MNIST database, CIFAR-10 dataset, and WebVision dataset, respectively. Also, the proposed approach demonstrated better results in specificity, sensitivity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value evaluation metrics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207