DIBS: Diversity Inducing Information Bottleneck in Model Ensembles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although deep learning models have achieved state-of-the art performance on a number of vision tasks, generalization over high dimensional multi-modal data, and reliable predictive uncertainty estimation are still active areas of research. Bayesian approaches including Bayesian Neural Nets (BNNs) do not scale well to modern computer vision tasks, as they are difficult to train, and have poor generalization under dataset-shift. This motivates the need for effective ensembles which can generalize and give reliable uncertainty estimates. In this paper, we target the problem of generating effective ensembles of neural networks by encouraging diversity in prediction. We explicitly optimize a diversity inducing adversarial loss for learning the stochastic latent variables and thereby obtain diversity in the output predictions necessary for modeling multi-modal data. We evaluate our method on benchmark datasets: MNIST, CIFAR100, TinyImageNet and MIT Places 2, and compared to the most competitive baselines show significant improvements in classification accuracy, under a shift in the data distribution and in out-of-distribution detection. over 10% relative improvement in classification accuracy, over 5% relative improvement in generalizing under dataset shift, and over 5% better predictive uncertainty estimation as inferred by efficient out-of-distribution (OOD) detection.
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 | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".