MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393212490 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.15567

Do not trust what you trust: Miscalibration in Semi-supervised Learning

2024· preprint· en· W4393212490 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shambhavi Mishra, Balamurali Murugesan, Ismail Ben Ayed, Marco Pedersoli, José Dolz

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCompute Canada
KeywordsPsychologyKnowledge managementComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

State-of-the-art semi-supervised learning (SSL) approaches rely on highly confident predictions to serve as pseudo-labels that guide the training on unlabeled samples. An inherent drawback of this strategy stems from the quality of the uncertainty estimates, as pseudo-labels are filtered only based on their degree of uncertainty, regardless of the correctness of their predictions. Thus, assessing and enhancing the uncertainty of network predictions is of paramount importance in the pseudo-labeling process. In this work, we empirically demonstrate that SSL methods based on pseudo-labels are significantly miscalibrated, and formally demonstrate the minimization of the min-entropy, a lower bound of the Shannon entropy, as a potential cause for miscalibration. To alleviate this issue, we integrate a simple penalty term, which enforces the logit distances of the predictions on unlabeled samples to remain low, preventing the network predictions to become overconfident. Comprehensive experiments on a variety of SSL image classification benchmarks demonstrate that the proposed solution systematically improves the calibration performance of relevant SSL models, while also enhancing their discriminative power, being an appealing addition to tackle SSL tasks.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.118
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.118
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.128 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207