MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394843753 · doi:10.1109/wacvw60836.2024.00053

Consolidating Separate Degradations Model via Weights Fusion and Distillation

2024· article· en· W4394843753 on OpenAlexaff
Dinesh Daultani, Hugo Larochelle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProcess Optimization and Integration
Canadian institutionsMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistillationFusionComputer scienceChemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real-world images prevalently contain different varieties of degradation, such as motion blur and luminance noise. Computer vision recognition models trained on clean images perform poorly on degraded images. Previously, several works have explored how to perform image classification of degraded images while training a single model for each degradation. Nevertheless, it becomes challenging to host several degradation models for each degradation on limited hardware applications and to estimate degradation parameters correctly at the run-time. This work proposes a method for effectively combining several models trained separately on different degradations into a single model to classify images with different types of degradations. Our proposed method is four-fold: (1) train a base model on clean images, (2) fine-tune the base model in-dividually for all given image degradations, (3) perform a fusion of weights given the fine-tuned models for individual degradations, (4) perform fine-tuning on given task using distillation and cross-entropy loss. Our proposed method can outperform previous state-of-the-art methods of pretraining in out-of-distribution generalization based on degradations such as JPEG compression, salt-and-pepper noise, Gaussian blur, and additive white Gaussian noise by 2.5% on CIFAR-100 dataset and by 1.3% on CIFAR-10 dataset. Moreover, our proposed method can handle degra-dation used for training without any explicit information about degradation at the inference time. Code will be available at https://github.com/dineshdaultani/FusionDistill.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicProcess Optimization and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207