Improving the Training of Data-Efficient GANs via Quality Aware Dynamic Discriminator Rejection Sampling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data-Efficient Generative Adversarial Nets (DE-GANs) have become more and more popular in recent years. Existing methods apply data augmentation, noise injection and pre-trained models to maximumly increase the number of training samples thus improving the training of DE-GANs. However, none of these methods considers the sample quality during training, which can also significantly influence the training of DE-GANs. Focusing on sample quality during training, in this paper, we are the first to incorporate discriminator rejection sampling (DRS) into the training process and introduce a novel method, called quality aware dynamic discriminator rejection sampling (QADDRS). Specifically, QADDRS consists of two steps: (1) the sample quality aware step, which aims to obtain the sorted critic scores, i.e., the ordered discriminator outputs, on real/fake samples in the current training stage; (2) the dynamic rejection step that obtains dynamic rejection number N, where N is controlled by the overfitting degree of discriminator (D) during training. When updating the parameters of D, the N high critic score real samples and the N low critic score fake samples in the minibatch are rejected dynamically based on the overfitting degree of D. As a result, QAD-DRS can avoid D becoming overly confident in distinguishing both real and fake samples, thereby alleviating the over-fitting of D issue during training. Extensive experiments on several datasets demonstrate that integrating QADDRS into different DE-GANs can achieve better performance and deliver state-of-the-art results. Codes are available at https://github.com/zzhang05/QADDRS.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".