mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Feature Dropout: Revisiting the Role of Augmentations in Contrastive Learning

arXiv 2212.08378 ↗First posted 16 Dec 2022cs.LG cs.CV cs.SDcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

What role do augmentations play in contrastive learning? Recent work suggests that good augmentations are label-preserving with respect to a specific downstream task. We complicate this picture by showing that label-destroying augmentations can be useful in the foundation model setting, where the goal is to learn diverse, general-purpose representations for multiple downstream tasks. We perform contrastive learning experiments on a range of image and audio datasets with multiple downstream tasks (e.g. for digits superimposed on photographs, predicting the class of one vs. the other). We find that Viewmaker Networks, a recently proposed model for learning augmentations for contrastive learning, produce label-destroying augmentations that stochastically destroy features needed for different downstream tasks. These augmentations are interpretable (e.g. altering shapes, digits, or letters added to images) and surprisingly often result in better performance compared to expert-designed augmentations, despite not preserving label information. To support our empirical results, we theoretically analyze a simple contrastive learning setting with a linear model. In this setting, label-destroying augmentations are crucial for preventing one set of features from suppressing the learning of features useful for another downstream task. Our results highlight the need for analyzing the interaction between multiple downstream tasks when trying to explain the success of foundation models.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 45 of its 61 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Dec 2022.

Builds on

45 of 61 references.

References · 45

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  3. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  4. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  5. 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 11,979
  6. 2019Momentum Contrast for Unsupervised Visual Representation Learningcited by 7,482
  7. 2022PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathwayscited by 5,304
  8. 2020Bootstrap your own latent: A new approach to self-supervised Learningcited by 4,712
  9. 2022Flamingo: a Visual Language Model for Few-Shot Learningcited by 4,337
  10. 2021Zero-Shot Text-to-Image Generationcited by 4,276
  11. 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 3,961
  12. 2014Deep Learning Face Attributes in the Wildcited by 3,679
33 more
  1. 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 2,927
  2. 2020Unsupervised Learning of Visual Features by Contrasting Cluster Assignmentscited by 2,845
  3. 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,928
  4. 2018Unsupervised Feature Learning via Non-Parametric Instance-level Discriminationcited by 1,838
  5. 2019SpecAugment: A Simple Data Augmentation Method for Automatic Speech Recognitioncited by 1,355
  6. 2019Distributionally Robust Neural Networks for Group Shifts: On the Importance of Regularization for Worst-Case Generalizationcited by 1,232
  7. 2020What Makes for Good Views for Contrastive Learning?cited by 843
  8. 2019Self-Supervised Learning of Pretext-Invariant Representationscited by 806
  9. 2022A Generalist Agentcited by 802
  10. 2019Learning Representations by Maximizing Mutual Information Across Viewscited by 733
  11. 2020The Pitfalls of Simplicity Bias in Neural Networkscited by 349
  12. 2020Noise or Signal: The Role of Image Backgrounds in Object Recognitioncited by 342
  13. 2021Provable Guarantees for Self-Supervised Deep Learning with Spectral Contrastive Losscited by 311
  14. 2020An Investigation of Why Overparameterization Exacerbates Spurious Correlationscited by 310
  15. 2014Discriminative Unsupervised Feature Learning with Exemplar Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 299
  16. 2020How Well Do Self-Supervised Models Transfer?cited by 213
  17. 2019Towards Explaining the Regularization Effect of Initial Large Learning Rate in Training Neural Networkscited by 162
  18. 2020An Empirical Study on Robustness to Spurious Correlations using Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 133
  19. 2020Intriguing Properties of Contrastive Lossescited by 129
  20. 2020What shapes feature representations? Exploring datasets, architectures, and trainingcited by 125
  21. 2021Can contrastive learning avoid shortcut solutions?cited by 114
  22. 2020What makes instance discrimination good for transfer learning?cited by 111
  23. 2022Chaos is a Ladder: A New Theoretical Understanding of Contrastive Learning via Augmentation Overlapcited by 105
  24. 2021When Does Contrastive Visual Representation Learning Work?cited by 92
  25. 2020Data Augmenting Contrastive Learning of Speech Representations in the Time Domaincited by 63
  26. 2020Robustness to Spurious Correlations via Human Annotationscited by 62
  27. 2020Viewmaker Networks: Learning Views for Unsupervised Representation Learningcited by 48
  28. 2020Automatic Shortcut Removal for Self-Supervised Representation Learningcited by 43
  29. 2020Language Through a Prism: A Spectral Approach for Multiscale Language Representationscited by 39
  30. 2022Active Learning Helps Pretrained Models Learn the Intended Taskcited by 33
  31. 2020Transfer Learning or Self-supervised Learning? A Tale of Two Pretraining Paradigmscited by 23
  32. 2020Addressing Feature Suppression in Unsupervised Visual Representationscited by 11
  33. 2021Tradeoffs Between Contrastive and Supervised Learning: An Empirical Studycited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 1; 2024: 3; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

9 papers.