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/Instance-Dependent Noisy Label Learning via Graphical Mode...

Instance-Dependent Noisy Label Learning via Graphical Modelling

Arpit Garg, Cuong Nguyen, Rafael Felix, Thanh-Toan Do, Gustavo Carneiro

2022-09-02Image ClassificationLearning with noisy labels
PaperPDFCode

Abstract

Noisy labels are unavoidable yet troublesome in the ecosystem of deep learning because models can easily overfit them. There are many types of label noise, such as symmetric, asymmetric and instance-dependent noise (IDN), with IDN being the only type that depends on image information. Such dependence on image information makes IDN a critical type of label noise to study, given that labelling mistakes are caused in large part by insufficient or ambiguous information about the visual classes present in images. Aiming to provide an effective technique to address IDN, we present a new graphical modelling approach called InstanceGM, that combines discriminative and generative models. The main contributions of InstanceGM are: i) the use of the continuous Bernoulli distribution to train the generative model, offering significant training advantages, and ii) the exploration of a state-of-the-art noisy-label discriminative classifier to generate clean labels from instance-dependent noisy-label samples. InstanceGM is competitive with current noisy-label learning approaches, particularly in IDN benchmarks using synthetic and real-world datasets, where our method shows better accuracy than the competitors in most experiments.

Results

TaskDatasetMetricValueModel
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 20% label noiseAccuracy60.89InstanceGM-SS
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 20% label noiseAccuracy58.38InstanceGM
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 60% label noiseAccuracy53.21InstanceGM-SS
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 60% label noiseAccuracy47.96InstanceGM
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 40% label noiseAccuracy56.37InstanceGM-SS
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 40% label noiseAccuracy52.24InstanceGM
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 80% label noiseAccuracy44.03InstanceGM-SS
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 80% label noiseAccuracy39.62InstanceGM
Image ClassificationCIFAR-10Test Accuracy95.9InstanceGM
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 80% label noiseTest Accuracy44.03InstanceGM-SS
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 80% label noiseTest Accuracy39.62InstanceGM
Image ClassificationANIMALAccuracy84.7InstanceGM with ConvNeXt
Image ClassificationANIMALAccuracy84.6InstanceGM
Image ClassificationANIMALAccuracy82.3InstanceGM with ResNet
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 40% label noiseTest Accuracy56.37InstanceGM-SS
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 40% label noiseTest Accuracy52.24InstanceGM
Image ClassificationCIFAR-100Test Accuracy77.19InstanceGM
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 60% label noiseTest Accuracy53.21InstanceGM-SS
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 60% label noiseTest Accuracy47.96InstanceGM
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 20% label noiseTest Accuracy60.89InstanceGM-SS
Image ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 20% label noiseTest Accuracy58.38InstanceGM
Document Text ClassificationCIFAR-10Test Accuracy95.9InstanceGM
Document Text ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 80% label noiseTest Accuracy44.03InstanceGM-SS
Document Text ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 80% label noiseTest Accuracy39.62InstanceGM
Document Text ClassificationANIMALAccuracy84.7InstanceGM with ConvNeXt
Document Text ClassificationANIMALAccuracy84.6InstanceGM
Document Text ClassificationANIMALAccuracy82.3InstanceGM with ResNet
Document Text ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 40% label noiseTest Accuracy56.37InstanceGM-SS
Document Text ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 40% label noiseTest Accuracy52.24InstanceGM
Document Text ClassificationCIFAR-100Test Accuracy77.19InstanceGM
Document Text ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 60% label noiseTest Accuracy53.21InstanceGM-SS
Document Text ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 60% label noiseTest Accuracy47.96InstanceGM
Document Text ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 20% label noiseTest Accuracy60.89InstanceGM-SS
Document Text ClassificationRed MiniImageNet 20% label noiseTest Accuracy58.38InstanceGM

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 AI2025-07-17CLID-MU: Cross-Layer Information Divergence Based Meta Update Strategy for Learning with Noisy Labels2025-07-16Hashed 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 Networks2025-07-14