REALM: Robust Entropy Adaptive Loss Minimization for Improved Single-Sample Test-Time Adaptation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Fully-test-time adaptation (F-TTA) can mitigate performance loss due to distribution shifts between train and test data (1) without access to the training data, and (2) without knowledge of the model training procedure. In online F-TTA, a pre-trained model is adapted using a stream of test samples by minimizing a self-supervised objective, such as entropy minimization. However, models adapted with online using entropy minimization, are unstable especially in single sample settings, leading to degenerate solutions, and limiting the adoption of TTA inference strategies. Prior works identify noisy, or unreliable, samples as a cause of failure in online F-TTA. One solution is to ignore these samples, which can lead to bias in the update procedure, slow adaptation, and poor generalization. In this work, we present a general framework for improving robustness of F-TTA to these noisy samples, inspired by self-paced learning and robust loss functions. Our proposed approach, Robust Entropy Adaptive Loss Minimization (REALM), achieves better adaptation accuracy than previous approaches throughout the adaptation process on corruptions of CIFAR-10 and ImageNet-1K, demonstrating its effectiveness.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 39 of its 61 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Sep 2023.
Builds on
39 of 61 references.
References · 39
- 2015Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shiftcited by 7,005
- 2016Layer Normalizationcited by 5,669
- 2016Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networkscited by 4,787
- 2019Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbationscited by 2,877
- 2020The Many Faces of Robustness: A Critical Analysis of Out-of-Distribution Generalizationcited by 1,850
- 2018Group Normalizationcited by 1,524
- 2020Sharpness-Aware Minimization for Efficiently Improving Generalizationcited by 1,417
- 2019Natural Adversarial Examplescited by 1,408
- 2019AugMix: A Simple Data Processing Method to Improve Robustness and Uncertaintycited by 901
- 2020Do We Really Need to Access the Source Data? Source Hypothesis Transfer for Unsupervised Domain Adaptationcited by 848
- 2021Domain Generalization: A Surveycited by 764
- 2022Continual Test-Time Domain Adaptationcited by 525
27 more
- 2022Efficient Test-Time Model Adaptation without Forgettingcited by 469
- 2020Improving robustness against common corruptions by covariate shift adaptationcited by 431
- 2023Towards Stable Test-Time Adaptation in Dynamic Wild Worldcited by 415
- 2021MEMO: Test Time Robustness via Adaptation and Augmentationcited by 377
- 2023A Comprehensive Survey on Test-Time Adaptation under Distribution Shiftscited by 359
- 2016Revisiting Batch Normalization For Practical Domain Adaptationcited by 288
- 2017A General and Adaptive Robust Loss Functioncited by 236
- 2020Evaluating Prediction-Time Batch Normalization for Robustness under Covariate Shiftcited by 236
- 2020Universal Source-Free Domain Adaptationcited by 220
- 2022Surgical Fine-Tuning Improves Adaptation to Distribution Shiftscited by 205
- 2022Parameter-free Online Test-time Adaptationcited by 189
- 2019A review of domain adaptation without target labelscited by 156
- 2023EcoTTA: Memory-Efficient Continual Test-time Adaptation via Self-distilled Regularizationcited by 123
- 2019Adversarial AutoAugmentcited by 111
- 2021On the Validity of Modeling SGD with Stochastic Differential Equations (SDEs)cited by 73
- 2022Back to the Source: Diffusion-Driven Test-Time Adaptationcited by 71
- 2022Improving Test-Time Adaptation via Shift-agnostic Weight Regularization and Nearest Source Prototypescited by 67
- 2023On Pitfalls of Test-Time Adaptationcited by 64
- 2021SITA: Single Image Test-time Adaptationcited by 59
- 2020Revisiting Batch Normalization for Improving Corruption Robustnesscited by 55
- 2021Test time Adaptation through Perturbation Robustnesscited by 28
- 2020Choosing the Sample with Lowest Loss makes SGD Robustcited by 26
- 2016Self-Paced Learning: an Implicit Regularization Perspectivecited by 21
- 2020One-Shot Unsupervised Cross-Domain Detectioncited by 19
- 2022Listen, Adapt, Better WER: Source-free Single-utterance Test-time Adaptation for Automatic Speech Recognitioncited by 19
- 2022Variational Model Perturbation for Source-Free Domain Adaptationcited by 18
- 2023AUTO: Adaptive Outlier Optimization for Test-Time OOD Detectioncited by 13
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 3; 2026: 3.
7 papers.
- 2023In Search of Lost Online Test-time Adaptation: A Surveycited by 44
- 2025CLIPTTA: Robust Contrastive Vision-Language Test-Time Adaptationcited by 5
- 2025Buffer layers for Test-Time Adaptationcited by 5
- 2025Q-PART: Quasi-Periodic Adaptive Regression with Test-time Training for Pediatric Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Regressioncited by 1
- 2026Entropy Minimization without Model Collapse: Mitigating Prediction Bias in Medical Imagingcited by 0
- 2026BP-TTA: Balanced and Prototype-Guided Test-Time Adaptation in Dynamic Scenarioscited by 0
- 2026Continual Test-Time Adaptation via Entropy Sensitivity-Guidance in Strict Online Settingcited by 0
- 2026Continual Test-Time Adaptation via Entropy Sensitivity-Guidance in Strict Online Setting30 Aug 2026
- 2026BP-TTA: Balanced and Prototype-Guided Test-Time Adaptation in Dynamic Scenarios30 Jun 2026
- 2026Entropy Minimization without Model Collapse: Mitigating Prediction Bias in Medical Imaging1 Jun 2026
- 2025Buffer layers for Test-Time Adaptation24 Oct 2025
- 2025CLIPTTA: Robust Contrastive Vision-Language Test-Time Adaptation18 Jul 2025
- 2025Q-PART: Quasi-Periodic Adaptive Regression with Test-time Training for Pediatric Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Regression6 Mar 2025
- 2023In Search of Lost Online Test-time Adaptation: A Survey31 Oct 2023