mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Exploring Data Augmentations on Self-/Semi-/Fully- Supervised Pre-trained Models

arXiv 2310.18850 ↗First posted 28 Oct 2023cs.CV cs.AI cs.LGcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Data augmentation has become a standard component of vision pre-trained models to capture the invariance between augmented views. In practice, augmentation techniques that mask regions of a sample with zero/mean values or patches from other samples are commonly employed in pre-trained models with self-/semi-/fully-supervised contrastive losses. However, the underlying mechanism behind the effectiveness of these augmentation techniques remains poorly explored. To investigate the problems, we conduct an empirical study to quantify how data augmentation affects performance. Concretely, we apply 4 types of data augmentations termed with Random Erasing, CutOut, CutMix and MixUp to a series of self-/semi-/fully- supervised pre-trained models. We report their performance on vision tasks such as image classification, object detection, instance segmentation, and semantic segmentation. We then explicitly evaluate the invariance and diversity of the feature embedding. We observe that: 1) Masking regions of the images decreases the invariance of the learned feature embedding while providing a more considerable diversity. 2) Manual annotations do not change the invariance or diversity of the learned feature embedding. 3) The MixUp approach improves the diversity significantly, with only a marginal decrease in terms of the invariance.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 38 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Oct 2023.

Builds on

38 of 43 references.

References · 38

  1. 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,498
  2. 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 11,979
  3. 2015Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networkscited by 9,617
  4. 2018Representation Learning with Contrastive Predictive Codingcited by 7,662
  5. 2019Momentum Contrast for Unsupervised Visual Representation Learningcited by 7,482
  6. 2017Mask R-CNNcited by 7,259
  7. 2021Emerging Properties in Self-Supervised Vision Transformerscited by 6,893
  8. 2017mixup: Beyond Empirical Risk Minimizationcited by 5,155
  9. 2014Fully Convolutional Networks for Semantic Segmentationcited by 4,845
  10. 2020Bootstrap your own latent: A new approach to self-supervised Learningcited by 4,712
  11. 2016The Cityscapes Dataset for Semantic Urban Scene Understandingcited by 4,427
  12. 2019CutMix: Regularization Strategy to Train Strong Classifiers with Localizable Featurescited by 2,875
26 more
  1. 2020Exploring Simple Siamese Representation Learningcited by 2,853
  2. 2020Unsupervised Learning of Visual Features by Contrasting Cluster Assignmentscited by 2,845
  3. 2020Supervised Contrastive Learningcited by 2,803
  4. 2020Improved Baselines with Momentum Contrastive Learningcited by 2,282
  5. 2018Unsupervised Feature Learning via Non-Parametric Instance-level Discriminationcited by 1,838
  6. 2017Improved Regularization of Convolutional Neural Networks with Cutoutcited by 1,623
  7. 2016Context Encoders: Feature Learning by Inpaintingcited by 1,424
  8. 2016Unsupervised Learning of Visual Representations by Solving Jigsaw Puzzlescited by 1,379
  9. 2020Big Self-Supervised Models are Strong Semi-Supervised Learnerscited by 1,375
  10. 2019Contrastive Multiview Codingcited by 1,297
  11. 2017Random Erasing Data Augmentationcited by 1,235
  12. 2019LVIS: A Dataset for Large Vocabulary Instance Segmentationcited by 1,215
  13. 2016Colorful Image Colorizationcited by 1,113
  14. 2016Semantic Understanding of Scenes through the ADE20K Datasetcited by 1,063
  15. 2020What Makes for Good Views for Contrastive Learning?cited by 843
  16. 2019Self-Supervised Learning of Pretext-Invariant Representationscited by 806
  17. 2020Prototypical Contrastive Learning of Unsupervised Representationscited by 636
  18. 2020Hard Negative Mixing for Contrastive Learningcited by 399
  19. 2020What Should Not Be Contrastive in Contrastive Learningcited by 224
  20. 2019Local Aggregation for Unsupervised Learning of Visual Embeddingscited by 204
  21. 2020AdCo: Adversarial Contrast for Efficient Learning of Unsupervised Representations from Self-Trained Negative Adversariescited by 90
  22. 2020LoCo: Local Contrastive Representation Learningcited by 55
  23. 2020Unsupervised Feature Learning by Cross-Level Instance-Group Discriminationcited by 51
  24. 2020Parametric Instance Classification for Unsupervised Visual Feature Learningcited by 41
  25. 2022Siamese Prototypical Contrastive Learningcited by 10
  26. 2022Rethinking Prototypical Contrastive Learning through Alignment, Uniformity and Correlationcited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.

1 paper.