TasksSotADatasetsPapersMethodsSubmitAbout
Papers With Code 2

A community resource for machine learning research: papers, code, benchmarks, and state-of-the-art results.

Explore

Notable BenchmarksAll SotADatasetsPapersMethods

Community

Submit ResultsAbout

Data sourced from the PWC Archive (CC-BY-SA 4.0). Built by the community, for the community.

Papers/NP-Match: When Neural Processes meet Semi-Supervised Learn...

NP-Match: When Neural Processes meet Semi-Supervised Learning

JianFeng Wang, Thomas Lukasiewicz, Daniela Massiceti, Xiaolin Hu, Vladimir Pavlovic, Alexandros Neophytou

2022-07-03Image ClassificationSemi-Supervised Image Classification
PaperPDFCode(official)

Abstract

Semi-supervised learning (SSL) has been widely explored in recent years, and it is an effective way of leveraging unlabeled data to reduce the reliance on labeled data. In this work, we adjust neural processes (NPs) to the semi-supervised image classification task, resulting in a new method named NP-Match. NP-Match is suited to this task for two reasons. Firstly, NP-Match implicitly compares data points when making predictions, and as a result, the prediction of each unlabeled data point is affected by the labeled data points that are similar to it, which improves the quality of pseudo-labels. Secondly, NP-Match is able to estimate uncertainty that can be used as a tool for selecting unlabeled samples with reliable pseudo-labels. Compared with uncertainty-based SSL methods implemented with Monte Carlo (MC) dropout, NP-Match estimates uncertainty with much less computational overhead, which can save time at both the training and the testing phases. We conducted extensive experiments on four public datasets, and NP-Match outperforms state-of-the-art (SOTA) results or achieves competitive results on them, which shows the effectiveness of NP-Match and its potential for SSL.

Results

TaskDatasetMetricValueModel
Image ClassificationCIFAR-10, 4000 LabelsPercentage error4.25UPS (wrn-28-2)
Image ClassificationSTL-10, 1000 LabelsAccuracy94.53NP-Match
Image ClassificationCIFAR-100, 2500 LabelsPercentage error26.03NP-Match
Image Classificationcifar-100, 10000 LabelsPercentage error21.22NP-Match
Image ClassificationCIFAR-100, 400 LabelsPercentage error38.67NP-Match
Image ClassificationSTL-10, 40 LabelsAccuracy85.8NP-Match
Image ClassificationCIFAR-10, 40 LabelsPercentage error4.91NP-Match
Image ClassificationCIFAR-10, 250 LabelsPercentage error4.87NP-Match
Semi-Supervised Image ClassificationCIFAR-10, 4000 LabelsPercentage error4.25UPS (wrn-28-2)
Semi-Supervised Image ClassificationSTL-10, 1000 LabelsAccuracy94.53NP-Match
Semi-Supervised Image ClassificationCIFAR-100, 2500 LabelsPercentage error26.03NP-Match
Semi-Supervised Image Classificationcifar-100, 10000 LabelsPercentage error21.22NP-Match
Semi-Supervised Image ClassificationCIFAR-100, 400 LabelsPercentage error38.67NP-Match
Semi-Supervised Image ClassificationSTL-10, 40 LabelsAccuracy85.8NP-Match
Semi-Supervised Image ClassificationCIFAR-10, 40 LabelsPercentage error4.91NP-Match
Semi-Supervised Image ClassificationCIFAR-10, 250 LabelsPercentage error4.87NP-Match

Related Papers

Automatic Classification and Segmentation of Tunnel Cracks Based on Deep Learning and Visual Explanations2025-07-18Adversarial attacks to image classification systems using evolutionary algorithms2025-07-17Efficient Adaptation of Pre-trained Vision Transformer underpinned by Approximately Orthogonal Fine-Tuning Strategy2025-07-17Federated Learning for Commercial Image Sources2025-07-17MUPAX: Multidimensional Problem Agnostic eXplainable AI2025-07-17Hashed Watermark as a Filter: Defeating Forging and Overwriting Attacks in Weight-based Neural Network Watermarking2025-07-15Transferring Styles for Reduced Texture Bias and Improved Robustness in Semantic Segmentation Networks2025-07-14FedGSCA: Medical Federated Learning with Global Sample Selector and Client Adaptive Adjuster under Label Noise2025-07-13