MixNN: Combating Noisy Labels in Deep Learning by Mixing with Nearest Neighbors
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
Noisy labels are ubiquitous in real-world datasets, especially in the ones from web sources. Training deep neural networks on noisy datasets is a challenging task, as the networks have been shown to overfit the noisy labels in training, resulting in performance degradation. When trained on noisy datasets, deep neural networks have been observed to fit t he clean samples during an "early learning" phase, before eventually memorizing the mislabeled samples. We further explore the representation distributions in the early learning stage and find that the representations of similar samples from the same classes congregate regardless of their noisy labels. Inspired by these findings, we propose MixNN, a novel framework to mitigate the influence of noisy labels. In contrast with existing methods, which identify and eliminate the mislabeled samples, we modify the mislabeled samples by mixing them with their nearest neighbors through a weighted sum approach. The weights are calculated with a mixture model learning from the sample loss distribution. To enhance the performance in the presence of extreme label noise, we propose a strategy to estimate the soft targets by gradually correcting the noisy labels. We demonstrate that the estimated targets yield a more accurate approximation to ground truth labels and a better quality of the learned representations with more separated and clearly bounded clusters. Extensive experiments in two benchmarks and two challenging real-world datasets demonstrate that our approach outperforms the existing state-of-the-art methods.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 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