CE-Dedup: Cost-Effective Convolutional Neural Nets Training based on Image Deduplication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attributed to the ever-increasing large image datasets, Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) have become popular for vision-based tasks. It is generally admirable to have larger-sized datasets for higher network training accuracies. However, the impact of dataset quality has not to be involved. It is reasonable to assume the near-duplicate images exist in the datasets. For instance, the Street View House Numbers (SVHN) dataset having cropped house plate digits from 0 to 9 are likely to have repetitive digits from the same/similar house plates. Redundant images may take up a certain portion of the dataset without consciousness. While contributing little to no accuracy improvement for the CNNs training, these duplicated images unnecessarily pose extra resource and computation consumption. To this end, this paper proposes a framework to assess the impact of the near-duplicate images on CNN training performance, called CE-Dedup. Specifically, CE-Dedup associates a hashing-based image deduplication approach with downstream CNNs-based image classification tasks. CE-Dedup balances the tradeoff between a large deduplication ratio and a stable accuracy by adjusting the deduplication threshold. The effectiveness of CE-Dedup is validated through extensive experiments on well-known CNN benchmarks. On one hand, while maintaining the same validation accuracy, CE-Dedup can reduce the dataset size by 23%. On the other hand, when allowing a small validation accuracy drop (by 5%), CE-Dedup can trim the dataset size by 75%.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".