mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

LoOp: Looking for Optimal Hard Negative Embeddings for Deep Metric Learning

arXiv 2108.09335 ↗First posted 20 Aug 2021cs.CV cs.LGcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Deep metric learning has been effectively used to learn distance metrics for different visual tasks like image retrieval, clustering, etc. In order to aid the training process, existing methods either use a hard mining strategy to extract the most informative samples or seek to generate hard synthetics using an additional network. Such approaches face different challenges and can lead to biased embeddings in the former case, and (i) harder optimization (ii) slower training speed (iii) higher model complexity in the latter case. In order to overcome these challenges, we propose a novel approach that looks for optimal hard negatives (LoOp) in the embedding space, taking full advantage of each tuple by calculating the minimum distance between a pair of positives and a pair of negatives. Unlike mining-based methods, our approach considers the entire space between pairs of embeddings to calculate the optimal hard negatives. Extensive experiments combining our approach and representative metric learning losses reveal a significant boost in performance on three benchmark datasets.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Aug 2021.

Builds on

28 of 56 references.

References · 28

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  3. 2015Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shiftcited by 6,979
  4. 2014Going Deeper with Convolutionscited by 4,231
  5. 2015FaceNet: A Unified Embedding for Face Recognition and Clusteringcited by 2,833
  6. 2017In Defense of the Triplet Loss for Person Re-Identificationcited by 784
  7. 2015Deep Metric Learning via Lifted Structured Feature Embeddingcited by 449
  8. 2019Multi-Similarity Loss with General Pair Weighting for Deep Metric Learningcited by 368
  9. 2020A Metric Learning Reality Checkcited by 317
  10. 2017Sampling Matters in Deep Embedding Learningcited by 285
  11. 2017No Fuss Distance Metric Learning using Proxiescited by 225
  12. 2014Learning Fine-grained Image Similarity with Deep Rankingcited by 189
16 more
  1. 2016Deep Image Retrieval: Learning global representations for image searchcited by 147
  2. 2019SOSNet: Second Order Similarity Regularization for Local Descriptor Learningcited by 131
  3. 2018Deep Metric Learning with Hierarchical Triplet Losscited by 112
  4. 2017Deep Metric Learning with Angular Losscited by 107
  5. 2017Smart Mining for Deep Metric Learningcited by 96
  6. 2019Improved Embeddings with Easy Positive Triplet Miningcited by 66
  7. 2018Attention-based Ensemble for Deep Metric Learningcited by 56
  8. 2019Hardness-Aware Deep Metric Learningcited by 55
  9. 2016Learning Deep Embeddings with Histogram Losscited by 52
  10. 2016Hard-Aware Deeply Cascaded Embeddingcited by 44
  11. 2018Deep Metric Learning with BIER: Boosting Independent Embeddings Robustlycited by 40
  12. 2017Learning Spread-out Local Feature Descriptorscited by 34
  13. 2020Embedding Expansion: Augmentation in Embedding Space for Deep Metric Learningcited by 27
  14. 2016Local Similarity-Aware Deep Feature Embeddingcited by 15
  15. 2019Energy Confused Adversarial Metric Learning for Zero-Shot Image Retrieval and Clusteringcited by 10
  16. 2016Deep Metric Learning via Facility Locationcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 4; 2023: 2; 2024: 1.

7 papers.