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

Class Adaptive Network Calibration

2023· article· en· W4386075939 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Bingyuan Liu, Jérôme Rony, Adrián Galdrán, José Dolz, Ismail Ben Ayed

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.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

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

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
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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207