MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382202917 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v37i9.26264

USDNL: Uncertainty-Based Single Dropout in Noisy Label Learning

2023· article· en· W4382202917 on OpenAlexaff
Yuanzhuo Xu, Xiaoguang Niu, Jie Yang, Steve Drew, Jiayu Zhou, Ruizhi Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersWuhan UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceDropout (neural networks)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceEntropy (arrow of time)ComputationArtificial neural networkCross entropyOverhead (engineering)Deep neural networksSelection (genetic algorithm)AlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) possess powerful prediction capability thanks to their over-parameterization design, although the large model complexity makes it suffer from noisy supervision. Recent approaches seek to eliminate impacts from noisy labels by excluding data points with large loss values and showing promising performance. However, these approaches usually associate with significant computation overhead and lack of theoretical analysis. In this paper, we adopt a perspective to connect label noise with epistemic uncertainty. We design a simple, efficient, and theoretically provable robust algorithm named USDNL for DNNs with uncertainty-based Dropout. Specifically, we estimate the epistemic uncertainty of the network prediction after early training through single Dropout. The epistemic uncertainty is then combined with cross-entropy loss to select the clean samples during training. Finally, we theoretically show the equivalence of replacing selection loss with single cross-entropy loss. Compared to existing small-loss selection methods, USDNL features its simplicity for practical scenarios by only applying Dropout to a standard network, while still achieving high model accuracy. Extensive empirical results on both synthetic and real-world datasets show that USDNL outperforms other methods. Our code is available at https://github.com/kovelxyz/USDNL.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207