Taming the Tail in Class-Conditional GANs: Knowledge Sharing via Unconditional Training at Lower Resolutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite extensive research on training generative adversarial networks (GANs) with limited training data, learning to generate images from long-tailed training distributions remains fairly unexplored. In the presence of imbalanced multiclass training data, GANs tend to favor classes with more samples, leading to the generation of low quality and less diverse samples in tail classes. In this study, we aim to improve the training of class-conditional GANs with long-tailed data. We propose a straightforward yet effective method for knowledge sharing, allowing tail classes to borrow from the rich information from classes with more abundant training data. More concretely, we propose modifications to existing class-conditional GAN architectures to ensure that the lower-resolution layers of the generator are trained entirely unconditionally while reserving class-conditional generation for the higher-resolution layers. Experiments on several long-tail benchmarks and GAN architectures demonstrate a significant improvement over existing methods in both the diversity and fidelity of the generated images. The code is available at https:github.com/khorrams/utlo.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".