Robust Representation Learning via Perceptual Similarity Metrics
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
A fundamental challenge in artificial intelligence is learning useful representations of data that yield good performance on a downstream task, without overfitting to spurious input features. Extracting such task-relevant predictive information is particularly difficult for real-world datasets. In this work, we propose Contrastive Input Morphing (CIM), a representation learning framework that learns input-space transformations of the data to mitigate the effect of irrelevant input features on downstream performance. Our method leverages a perceptual similarity metric via a triplet loss to ensure that the transformation preserves task-relevant information.Empirically, we demonstrate the efficacy of our approach on tasks which typically suffer from the presence of spurious correlations: classification with nuisance information, out-of-distribution generalization, and preservation of subgroup accuracies. We additionally show that CIM is complementary to other mutual information-based representation learning techniques, and demonstrate that it improves the performance of variational information bottleneck (VIB) when used together.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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