The Devil is in the Margin: Margin-based Label Smoothing for Network Calibration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In spite of the dominant performances of deep neural networks, recent works have shown that they are poorly calibrated, resulting in over-confident predictions. Miscalibration can be exacerbated by overfitting due to the minimization of the cross-entropy during training, as it promotes the predicted softmax probabilities to match the one-hot label assignments. This yields a pre-softmax activation of the correct class that is significantly larger than the remaining activations. Recent evidence from the literature suggests that loss functions that embed implicit or explicit maximization of the entropy of predictions yield state-of-the-art calibration performances. We provide a unifying constrained-optimization perspective of current state-of-the-art calibration losses. Specifically, these losses could be viewed as approximations of a linear penalty (or a Lagrangian) imposing equality constraints on logit distances. This points to an important limitation of such underlying equality constraints, whose ensuing gradients constantly push towards a non-informative solution, which might prevent from reaching the best compromise between the discriminative performance and calibration of the model during gradient-based optimization. Following our observations, we propose a simple and flexible generalization based on inequality constraints, which imposes a controllable margin on logit distances. Comprehensive experiments on a variety of image classification, semantic segmentation and NLP benchmarks demonstrate that our method sets novel state-of-the-art results on these tasks in terms of network calibration, without affecting the discriminative performance. The code is available at https://github.com/by-liu/MbLS .
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 | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".