MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386075939 · doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.01542

Class Adaptive Network Calibration

2023· article· en· W4386075939 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceSmoothingMachine learningArtificial intelligenceClass (philosophy)Code (set theory)ScalabilityArtificial neural networkCalibrationContextual image classificationData miningImage (mathematics)MathematicsComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies have revealed that, beyond conventional accuracy, calibration should also be considered for training modern deep neural networks. To address miscalibration during learning, some methods have explored different penalty functions as part of the learning objective, along-side a standard classification loss, with a hyper-parameter controlling the relative contribution of each term. Nevertheless, these methods share two major drawbacks: 1) the scalar balancing weight is the same for all classes, hindering the ability to address different intrinsic difficulties or imbalance among classes; and 2) the balancing weight is usually fixed without an adaptive strategy, which may prevent from reaching the best compromise between accuracy and calibration, and requires hyper-parameter search for each application. We propose Class Adaptive Label Smoothing (CALS) for calibrating deep networks, which allows to learn class-wise multipliers during training, yielding a powerful alternative to common label smoothing penalties. Our method builds on a general Augmented Lagrangian approach, a well-established technique in constrained optimization, but we introduce several modifications to tailor it for large-scale, class-adaptive training. Comprehensive evaluation and multiple comparisons on a variety of benchmarks, including standard and long-tailed image classification, semantic segmentation, and text classification, demonstrate the superiority of the proposed method. The code is available at https://github.com/by-liu/CALS.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.773

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207