MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4287777770 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.07839

Joint Progressive Knowledge Distillation and Unsupervised Domain\n Adaptation

2020· preprint· en· W4287777770 on OpenAlexaff
Le Thanh Nguyen-Meidine, Éric Granger, Madhu Kiran, José Dolz, Louis-Antoine Blais-Morin

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Canadian institutionsGenetec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceDomain adaptationDomain (mathematical analysis)Divergence (linguistics)Machine learningSet (abstract data type)Pattern recognition (psychology)Data miningClassifier (UML)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently, the divergence in distributions of design and operational data,\nand large computational complexity are limiting factors in the adoption of CNNs\nin real-world applications. For instance, person re-identification systems\ntypically rely on a distributed set of cameras, where each camera has different\ncapture conditions. This can translate to a considerable shift between source\n(e.g. lab setting) and target (e.g. operational camera) domains. Given the cost\nof annotating image data captured for fine-tuning in each target domain,\nunsupervised domain adaptation (UDA) has become a popular approach to adapt\nCNNs. Moreover, state-of-the-art deep learning models that provide a high level\nof accuracy often rely on architectures that are too complex for real-time\napplications. Although several compression and UDA approaches have recently\nbeen proposed to overcome these limitations, they do not allow optimizing a CNN\nto simultaneously address both. In this paper, we propose an unexplored\ndirection -- the joint optimization of CNNs to provide a compressed model that\nis adapted to perform well for a given target domain. In particular, the\nproposed approach performs unsupervised knowledge distillation (KD) from a\ncomplex teacher model to a compact student model, by leveraging both source and\ntarget data. It also improves upon existing UDA techniques by progressively\nteaching the student about domain-invariant features, instead of directly\nadapting a compact model on target domain data. Our method is compared against\nstate-of-the-art compression and UDA techniques, using two popular\nclassification datasets for UDA -- Office31 and ImageClef-DA. In both datasets,\nresults indicate that our method can achieve the highest level of accuracy\nwhile requiring a comparable or lower time complexity.\n

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.135
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.070 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningFrench-language works237,207