Self-Adaptive Training: Bridging Supervised and Self-Supervised Learning
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
We propose self-adaptive training -- a unified training algorithm that dynamically calibrates and enhances training processes by model predictions without incurring an extra computational cost -- to advance both supervised and self-supervised learning of deep neural networks. We analyze the training dynamics of deep networks on training data that are corrupted by, e.g., random noise and adversarial examples. Our analysis shows that model predictions are able to magnify useful underlying information in data and this phenomenon occurs broadly even in the absence of any label information, highlighting that model predictions could substantially benefit the training processes: self-adaptive training improves the generalization of deep networks under noise and enhances the self-supervised representation learning. The analysis also sheds light on understanding deep learning, e.g., a potential explanation of the recently-discovered double-descent phenomenon in empirical risk minimization and the collapsing issue of the state-of-the-art self-supervised learning algorithms. Experiments on the CIFAR, STL, and ImageNet datasets verify the effectiveness of our approach in three applications: classification with label noise, selective classification, and linear evaluation. To facilitate future research, the code has been made publicly available at https://github.com/LayneH/self-adaptive-training.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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