MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400404142 · doi:10.55092/aias20240003

Bridging domain gaps in CNNs: a comprehensive approach with adaptation and randomization strategies

2024· article· en· W4400404142 on OpenAlexaff
Chen Sun, Xingxin Chen, Yukun Lu, Dongpu Cao, Amir Khajepour

Bibliographic record

VenueArtificial Intelligence and Autonomous Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)Domain adaptationComputer scienceAdaptation (eye)RandomizationPsychologyArtificial intelligenceMedicineRandomized controlled trialNeuroscienceComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metric-based methods are promising approaches to domain adaptation, aiming to align the marginal distributions of different domains with similar conditional distributions. In traditional approaches, the metric function is manually designed to measure the distance across domains. Adversarial methods can be considered an automatic learning approach to the metric function. Instead of relying on the quality of the metric function, we outline a generalized framework for domain randomization, which first introduces moderate perturbations as a form of randomness and then combines the advantages of metric-based domain adaptation with domain randomization. We propose a novel approach leveraging simulation environments to generate extensive, annotated data for diverse scenarios. Our focus is on simulation-to-real transfer for semantic segmentation tasks, acknowledging CNN’s texture bias. We introduce a domain randomization technique that limits meaningful texture information and devise a mapping function for image transformation. The proposed approach emphasizes geometry consistency and style transfer, providing a practical solution for efficient simulation to real-world transfer. The experiments are conducted on the domain generalization task from GTA to Cityscapes and BDD, and evaluated on the semantic segmentation performance. Our method achieves superior results in most segmentation classes compared with the benchmark models by 5.2 to 10 in terms of mIoU. Remarkably, our generalization strategy does not require access the target domain data at training time.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.262
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
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 venueArtificial Intelligence and Autonomous SystemsSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207