MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402903985 · doi:10.1109/cvprw63382.2024.00765

ATOM: Attention Mixer for Efficient Dataset Distillation

2024· article· en· W4402903985 on OpenAlexaff
Samir Khaki, Ahmad Sajedi, Kai Wang, Lucy Liu, Yuri Lawryshyn, Konstantinos N. Plataniotis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsRoyal Bank of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistillationAtom (system on chip)Computer scienceAtom opticsAtomic physicsPhysicsChemistryParallel computingChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent works in dataset distillation seek to minimize training expenses by generating a condensed synthetic dataset that encapsulates the information present in a larger real dataset. These approaches ultimately aim to attain test accuracy levels akin to those achieved by models trained on the entirety of the original dataset. Previous studies in feature and distribution matching have achieved significant results without incurring the costs of bi-level optimization in the distillation process. Despite their convincing efficiency, many of these methods suffer from marginal downstream performance improvements, limited distillation of contextual information, and subpar cross-architecture generalization. To address these challenges in dataset distillation, we propose the ATtentiOn Mixer (ATOM) module to efficiently distill large datasets using a mixture of channel and spatial-wise attention in the feature matching process. Spatial-wise attention helps guide the learning process based on consistent localization of classes in their respective images, allowing for distillation from a broader receptive field. Meanwhile, channel-wise attention captures the contextual information associated with the class itself, thus making the synthetic image more informative for training. By integrating both types of attention, our ATOM module demonstrates superior performance across various computer vision datasets, including CIFAR10/100 and Tiny-Imagenet. Notably, our method significantly improves performance in scenarios with a low number of images per class, thereby enhancing its potential. Furthermore, we maintain the improvement on cross-architectures and applications such as neural architecture search.

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)0.004
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207