StarFT: Robust Fine-tuning of Zero-shot Models via Spuriosity Alignment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Learning robust representations from data often requires scale, which has led to the success of recent zero-shot models such as CLIP. However, the obtained robustness can easily be deteriorated when these models are fine-tuned on other downstream tasks (e.g., of smaller scales). Previous works often interpret this phenomenon in the context of domain shift, developing fine-tuning methods that aim to preserve the original domain as much as possible. However, in a different context, fine-tuned models with limited data are also prone to learning features that are spurious to humans, such as background or texture. In this paper, we propose StarFT (Spurious Textual Alignment Regularization), a novel framework for fine-tuning zero-shot models to enhance robustness by preventing them from learning spuriosity. We introduce a regularization that aligns the output distribution for spuriosity-injected labels with the original zero-shot model, ensuring that the model is not induced to extract irrelevant features further from these descriptions. We leverage recent language models to get such spuriosity-injected labels by generating alternative textual descriptions that highlight potentially confounding features. Extensive experiments validate the robust generalization of StarFT and its emerging properties: zero-shot group robustness and improved zero-shot classification. Notably, StarFT boosts both worst-group and average accuracy by 14.30% and 3.02%, respectively, in the Waterbirds group shift scenario, where other robust fine-tuning baselines show even degraded performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".