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/How does Disagreement Help Generalization against Label Co...

How does Disagreement Help Generalization against Label Corruption?

Xingrui Yu, Bo Han, Jiangchao Yao, Gang Niu, Ivor W. Tsang, Masashi Sugiyama

2019-01-14Learning with noisy labelsMemorization
PaperPDFCodeCodeCode

Abstract

Learning with noisy labels is one of the hottest problems in weakly-supervised learning. Based on memorization effects of deep neural networks, training on small-loss instances becomes very promising for handling noisy labels. This fosters the state-of-the-art approach "Co-teaching" that cross-trains two deep neural networks using the small-loss trick. However, with the increase of epochs, two networks converge to a consensus and Co-teaching reduces to the self-training MentorNet. To tackle this issue, we propose a robust learning paradigm called Co-teaching+, which bridges the "Update by Disagreement" strategy with the original Co-teaching. First, two networks feed forward and predict all data, but keep prediction disagreement data only. Then, among such disagreement data, each network selects its small-loss data, but back propagates the small-loss data from its peer network and updates its own parameters. Empirical results on benchmark datasets demonstrate that Co-teaching+ is much superior to many state-of-the-art methods in the robustness of trained models.

Results

TaskDatasetMetricValueModel
Image ClassificationCIFAR-10N-Random2Accuracy (mean)89.47Co-Teaching+
Image ClassificationCIFAR-10N-Random3Accuracy (mean)89.54Co-Teaching+
Image ClassificationCIFAR-10N-AggregateAccuracy (mean)90.61Co-Teaching+
Image ClassificationCIFAR-10N-Random1Accuracy (mean)89.7Co-Teaching+
Image ClassificationCIFAR-100NAccuracy (mean)57.88Co-Teaching+
Image ClassificationCIFAR-10N-WorstAccuracy (mean)83.26Co-Teaching+
Document Text ClassificationCIFAR-10N-Random2Accuracy (mean)89.47Co-Teaching+
Document Text ClassificationCIFAR-10N-Random3Accuracy (mean)89.54Co-Teaching+
Document Text ClassificationCIFAR-10N-AggregateAccuracy (mean)90.61Co-Teaching+
Document Text ClassificationCIFAR-10N-Random1Accuracy (mean)89.7Co-Teaching+
Document Text ClassificationCIFAR-100NAccuracy (mean)57.88Co-Teaching+
Document Text ClassificationCIFAR-10N-WorstAccuracy (mean)83.26Co-Teaching+

Related Papers

CLID-MU: Cross-Layer Information Divergence Based Meta Update Strategy for Learning with Noisy Labels2025-07-16What Should LLMs Forget? Quantifying Personal Data in LLMs for Right-to-Be-Forgotten Requests2025-07-15Reasoning or Memorization? Unreliable Results of Reinforcement Learning Due to Data Contamination2025-07-14Entropy-Memorization Law: Evaluating Memorization Difficulty of Data in LLMs2025-07-08MMReason: An Open-Ended Multi-Modal Multi-Step Reasoning Benchmark for MLLMs Toward AGI2025-06-30Listener-Rewarded Thinking in VLMs for Image Preferences2025-06-28Where to find Grokking in LLM Pretraining? Monitor Memorization-to-Generalization without Test2025-06-26Counterfactual Influence as a Distributional Quantity2025-06-25