Phi Vu Tran
Recent advances in semi-supervised learning have shown tremendous potential in overcoming a major barrier to the success of modern machine learning algorithms: access to vast amounts of human-labeled training data. Previous algorithms based on consistency regularization can harness the abundance of unlabeled data to produce impressive results on a number of semi-supervised benchmarks, approaching the performance of strong supervised baselines using only a fraction of the available labeled data. In this work, we challenge the long-standing success of consistency regularization by introducing self-supervised regularization as the basis for combining semantic feature representations from unlabeled data. We perform extensive comparative experiments to demonstrate the effectiveness of self-supervised regularization for supervised and semi-supervised image classification on SVHN, CIFAR-10, and CIFAR-100 benchmark datasets. We present two main results: (1) models augmented with self-supervised regularization significantly improve upon traditional supervised classifiers without the need for unlabeled data; (2) together with unlabeled data, our models yield semi-supervised performance competitive with, and in many cases exceeding, prior state-of-the-art consistency baselines. Lastly, our models have the practical utility of being efficiently trained end-to-end and require no additional hyper-parameters to tune for optimal performance beyond the standard set for training neural networks. Reference code and data are available at https://github.com/vuptran/sesemi
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Image Classification | CIFAR-10, 4000 Labels | Percentage error | 11.65 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Image Classification | CIFAR-10, 2000 Labels | Accuracy | 85.78 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Image Classification | SVHN, 500 Labels | Accuracy | 93.5 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Image Classification | CIFAR-10, 1000 Labels | Accuracy | 82.12 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Image Classification | cifar-100, 10000 Labels | Percentage error | 38.7 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Image Classification | SVHN, 1000 labels | Accuracy | 94.41 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Image Classification | SVHN, 250 Labels | Accuracy | 91.68 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Semi-Supervised Image Classification | CIFAR-10, 4000 Labels | Percentage error | 11.65 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Semi-Supervised Image Classification | CIFAR-10, 2000 Labels | Accuracy | 85.78 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Semi-Supervised Image Classification | SVHN, 500 Labels | Accuracy | 93.5 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Semi-Supervised Image Classification | CIFAR-10, 1000 Labels | Accuracy | 82.12 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Semi-Supervised Image Classification | cifar-100, 10000 Labels | Percentage error | 38.7 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Semi-Supervised Image Classification | SVHN, 1000 labels | Accuracy | 94.41 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |
| Semi-Supervised Image Classification | SVHN, 250 Labels | Accuracy | 91.68 | SESEMI SSL (ConvNet) |