mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

A Data-Augmentation Is Worth A Thousand Samples: Exact Quantification From Analytical Augmented Sample Moments

arXiv 2202.08325 ↗First posted 16 Feb 2022cs.LG cs.CVcited by 14

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Data-Augmentation (DA) is known to improve performance across tasks and datasets. We propose a method to theoretically analyze the effect of DA and study questions such as: how many augmented samples are needed to correctly estimate the information encoded by that DA? How does the augmentation policy impact the final parameters of a model? We derive several quantities in close-form, such as the expectation and variance of an image, loss, and model's output under a given DA distribution. Those derivations open new avenues to quantify the benefits and limitations of DA. For example, we show that common DAs require tens of thousands of samples for the loss at hand to be correctly estimated and for the model training to converge. We show that for a training loss to be stable under DA sampling, the model's saliency map (gradient of the loss with respect to the model's input) must align with the smallest eigenvector of the sample variance under the considered DA augmentation, hinting at a possible explanation on why models tend to shift their focus from edges to textures.

Key facts. Cited by 14 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Feb 2022.

Builds on

21 of 45 references.

References · 21

  1. 2017mixup: Beyond Empirical Risk Minimizationcited by 5,155
  2. 2019CutMix: Regularization Strategy to Train Strong Classifiers with Localizable Featurescited by 2,875
  3. 2016Identity Mappings in Deep Residual Networkscited by 1,960
  4. 2021Barlow Twins: Self-Supervised Learning via Redundancy Reductioncited by 1,818
  5. 2017Improved Regularization of Convolutional Neural Networks with Cutoutcited by 1,623
  6. 2018ImageNet-trained CNNs are biased towards texture; increasing shape bias improves accuracy and robustnesscited by 1,430
  7. 2015Spatial Transformer Networkscited by 1,423
  8. 2019Self-Supervised Learning of Pretext-Invariant Representationscited by 806
  9. 2017The Implicit Bias of Gradient Descent on Separable Datacited by 649
  10. 2017The Effectiveness of Data Augmentation in Image Classification using Deep Learningcited by 368
  11. 2014In Search of the Real Inductive Bias: On the Role of Implicit Regularization in Deep Learningcited by 339
  12. 2018Implicit Bias of Gradient Descent on Linear Convolutional Networkscited by 251
9 more
  1. 2020Implicit Regularization in Deep Learning May Not Be Explainable by Normscited by 118
  2. 2018Three Mechanisms of Weight Decay Regularizationcited by 112
  3. 2017Implicit Regularization in Deep Learningcited by 90
  4. 2020The Implicit and Explicit Regularization Effects of Dropoutcited by 71
  5. 2018Data augmentation instead of explicit regularizationcited by 62
  6. 2018A representer theorem for deep neural networkscited by 38
  7. 2015Dropout as data augmentationcited by 27
  8. 2019Further advantages of data augmentation on convolutional neural networkscited by 19
  9. 2018Do deep nets really need weight decay and dropout?cited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 5; 2023: 6; 2024: 3.

14 papers.

Sort: