mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Rethinking Evaluation Protocols of Visual Representations Learned via Self-supervised Learning

arXiv 2304.03456 ↗First posted 7 Apr 2023cs.CV cs.LGcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Linear probing (LP) (and k-NN) on the upstream dataset with labels (e.g., ImageNet) and transfer learning (TL) to various downstream datasets are commonly employed to evaluate the quality of visual representations learned via self-supervised learning (SSL). Although existing SSL methods have shown good performances under those evaluation protocols, we observe that the performances are very sensitive to the hyperparameters involved in LP and TL. We argue that this is an undesirable behavior since truly generic representations should be easily adapted to any other visual recognition task, i.e., the learned representations should be robust to the settings of LP and TL hyperparameters. In this work, we try to figure out the cause of performance sensitivity by conducting extensive experiments with state-of-the-art SSL methods. First, we find that input normalization for LP is crucial to eliminate performance variations according to the hyperparameters. Specifically, batch normalization before feeding inputs to a linear classifier considerably improves the stability of evaluation, and also resolves inconsistency of k-NN and LP metrics. Second, for TL, we demonstrate that a weight decay parameter in SSL significantly affects the transferability of learned representations, which cannot be identified by LP or k-NN evaluations on the upstream dataset. We believe that the findings of this study will be beneficial for the community by drawing attention to the shortcomings in the current SSL evaluation schemes and underscoring the need to reconsider them.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Apr 2023.

Builds on

29 of 35 references.

References · 29

  1. 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 12,049
  2. 2019Momentum Contrast for Unsupervised Visual Representation Learningcited by 7,513
  3. 2021Masked Autoencoders Are Scalable Vision Learnerscited by 7,403
  4. 2021Emerging Properties in Self-Supervised Vision Transformerscited by 6,968
  5. 2015Rethinking the Inception Architecture for Computer Visioncited by 5,475
  6. 2017mixup: Beyond Empirical Risk Minimizationcited by 5,183
  7. 2020Bootstrap your own latent: A new approach to self-supervised Learningcited by 4,750
  8. 2020Training data-efficient image transformers & distillation through attentioncited by 4,586
  9. 2019CutMix: Regularization Strategy to Train Strong Classifiers with Localizable Featurescited by 2,884
  10. 2021BEiT: BERT Pre-Training of Image Transformerscited by 2,375
  11. 2019RandAugment: Practical automated data augmentation with a reduced search spacecited by 2,269
  12. 2018Unsupervised Feature Learning via Non-Parametric Instance-level Discriminationcited by 1,845
17 more
  1. 2021An Empirical Study of Training Self-Supervised Vision Transformerscited by 1,616
  2. 2018Unsupervised Representation Learning by Predicting Image Rotationscited by 1,591
  3. 2017Random Erasing Data Augmentationcited by 1,239
  4. 2017Visualizing the Loss Landscape of Neural Netscited by 1,130
  5. 2016Colorful Image Colorizationcited by 1,114
  6. 2021iBOT: Image BERT Pre-Training with Online Tokenizercited by 903
  7. 2019Learning Representations by Maximizing Mutual Information Across Viewscited by 734
  8. 2020What is being transferred in transfer learning?cited by 368
  9. 2022How Do Vision Transformers Work?cited by 307
  10. 2022Masked Siamese Networks for Label-Efficient Learningcited by 302
  11. 2021When Vision Transformers Outperform ResNets without Pre-training or Strong Data Augmentationscited by 260
  12. 2021Efficient Self-supervised Vision Transformers for Representation Learningcited by 149
  13. 2021MST: Masked Self-Supervised Transformer for Visual Representationcited by 114
  14. 2020OBoW: Online Bag-of-Visual-Words Generation for Self-Supervised Learningcited by 65
  15. 2022Mugs: A Multi-Granular Self-Supervised Learning Frameworkcited by 54
  16. 2021Towards Demystifying Representation Learning with Non-contrastive Self-supervisioncited by 23
  17. 2022Beyond Supervised vs. Unsupervised: Representative Benchmarking and Analysis of Image Representation Learningcited by 20

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 2; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

4 papers.