A Gift from Label Smoothing: Robust Training with Adaptive Label Smoothing via Auxiliary Classifier under Label Noise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As deep neural networks can easily overfit noisy labels, robust training in the presence of noisy labels is becoming an important challenge in modern deep learning. While existing methods address this problem in various directions, they still produce unpredictable sub-optimal results since they rely on the posterior information estimated by the feature extractor corrupted by noisy labels. Lipschitz regularization successfully alleviates this problem by training a robust feature extractor, but it requires longer training time and expensive computations. Motivated by this, we propose a simple yet effective method, called ALASCA, which efficiently provides a robust feature extractor under label noise. ALASCA integrates two key ingredients: (1) adaptive label smoothing based on our theoretical analysis that label smoothing implicitly induces Lipschitz regularization, and (2) auxiliary classifiers that enable practical application of intermediate Lipschitz regularization with negligible computations. We conduct wide-ranging experiments for ALASCA and combine our proposed method with previous noise-robust methods on several synthetic and real-world datasets. Experimental results show that our framework consistently improves the robustness of feature extractors and the performance of existing baselines with efficiency.
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 | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".