A Study on the Predictability of Sample Learning Consistency
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Curriculum Learning is a powerful training method that allows for faster and better training in some settings. This method, however, requires having a notion of which examples are difficult and which are easy, which is not always trivial to provide. A recent metric called C-Score acts as a proxy for example difficulty by relating it to learning consistency. Unfortunately, this method is quite compute intensive which limits its applicability for alternative datasets. In this work, we train models through different methods to predict C-Score for CIFAR-100 and CIFAR-10. We find, however, that these models generalize poorly both within the same distribution as well as out of distribution. This suggests that C-Score is not defined by the individual characteristics of each sample but rather by other factors. We hypothesize that a sample's relation to its neighbours, in particular, how many of them share the same labels, can help in explaining C-Scores. We plan to explore this in future work.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 19 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jul 2022.
Builds on
8 of 19 references.
References · 8
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2014Going Deeper with Convolutionscited by 4,231
- 2017A Closer Look at Memorization in Deep Networkscited by 936
- 2018An Empirical Study of Example Forgetting during Deep Neural Network Learningcited by 669
- 2021Deep Learning Through the Lens of Example Difficultycited by 139
- 2020When Do Curricula Work?cited by 105
- 2020Characterizing Structural Regularities of Labeled Data in Overparameterized Modelscited by 93
- 2017How hard can it be? Estimating the difficulty of visual search in an imagecited by 52
Built on by
Not cited yet.