Augmentations vs Algorithms: What Works in Self-Supervised Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We study the relative effects of data augmentations, pretraining algorithms, and model architectures in Self-Supervised Learning (SSL). While the recent literature in this space leaves the impression that the pretraining algorithm is of critical importance to performance, understanding its effect is complicated by the difficulty in making objective and direct comparisons between methods. We propose a new framework which unifies many seemingly disparate SSL methods into a single shared template. Using this framework, we identify aspects in which methods differ and observe that in addition to changing the pretraining algorithm, many works also use new data augmentations or more powerful model architectures. We compare several popular SSL methods using our framework and find that many algorithmic additions, such as prediction networks or new losses, have a minor impact on downstream task performance (often less than 1%), while enhanced augmentation techniques offer more significant performance improvements (2-4%). Our findings challenge the premise that SSL is being driven primarily by algorithmic improvements, and suggest instead a bitter lesson for SSL: that augmentation diversity and data / model scale are more critical contributors to recent advances in self-supervised learning.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Mar 2024.
Builds on
31 of 45 references.
References · 31
- 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 30,186
- 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
- 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 12,049
- 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,498
- 2023DINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without Supervisioncited by 7,974
- 2018Representation Learning with Contrastive Predictive Codingcited by 7,777
- 2021Masked Autoencoders Are Scalable Vision Learnerscited by 7,403
- 2015Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shiftcited by 7,005
- 2020Bootstrap your own latent: A new approach to self-supervised Learningcited by 4,750
- 2016Gaussian Error Linear Units (GELUs)cited by 3,502
- 2016Wide Residual Networkscited by 3,070
- 2020Exploring Simple Siamese Representation Learningcited by 2,866
19 more
- 2020Unsupervised Learning of Visual Features by Contrasting Cluster Assignmentscited by 2,857
- 2020Improved Baselines with Momentum Contrastive Learningcited by 2,287
- 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,969
- 2021Barlow Twins: Self-Supervised Learning via Redundancy Reductioncited by 1,838
- 2021An Empirical Study of Training Self-Supervised Vision Transformerscited by 1,616
- 2018Unsupervised Representation Learning by Predicting Image Rotationscited by 1,591
- 2016Context Encoders: Feature Learning by Inpaintingcited by 1,428
- 2020Big Self-Supervised Models are Strong Semi-Supervised Learnerscited by 1,380
- 2016Colorful Image Colorizationcited by 1,114
- 2023Self-Supervised Learning from Images with a Joint-Embedding Predictive Architecturecited by 1,039
- 2019Data-Efficient Image Recognition with Contrastive Predictive Codingcited by 673
- 2017Large Batch Training of Convolutional Networkscited by 535
- 2022Masked Siamese Networks for Label-Efficient Learningcited by 302
- 2023A Cookbook of Self-Supervised Learningcited by 250
- 2021Want To Reduce Labeling Cost? GPT-3 Can Helpcited by 196
- 2022On the Importance of Asymmetry for Siamese Representation Learningcited by 39
- 2022Weighted Ensemble Self-Supervised Learningcited by 19
- 2023Random Field Augmentations for Self-Supervised Representation Learningcited by 2
- 2023Disentangling the Effects of Data Augmentation and Format Transform in Self-Supervised Learning of Image Representationscited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 5; 2026: 2.
9 papers.
- 2025Joint Embedding vs Reconstruction: Provable Benefits of Latent Space Prediction for Self Supervised Learningcited by 36
- 2025Perch 2.0: The Bittern Lesson for Bioacousticscited by 26
- 2024What Variables Affect Out-of-Distribution Generalization in Pretrained Models?cited by 13
- 2025Position: An Empirically Grounded Identifiability Theory Will Accelerate Self-Supervised Learning Researchcited by 9
- 2025Clustering Properties of Self-Supervised Learningcited by 8
- 2024Contrastive Learning Via Equivariant Representationcited by 1
- 2025Beyond Instance Consistency: Investigating View Diversity in Self-supervised Learningcited by 1
- 2026Self-Supervised Learning with a Multi-Task Latent Space Objectivecited by 0
- 2026LEMON: a foundation model for nuclear morphology in Computational Pathologycited by 0
- 2026LEMON: a foundation model for nuclear morphology in Computational Pathology26 Mar 2026
- 2026Self-Supervised Learning with a Multi-Task Latent Space Objective5 Feb 2026
- 2025Beyond Instance Consistency: Investigating View Diversity in Self-supervised Learning14 Sep 2025
- 2025Perch 2.0: The Bittern Lesson for Bioacoustics6 Aug 2025
- 2025Joint Embedding vs Reconstruction: Provable Benefits of Latent Space Prediction for Self Supervised Learning18 May 2025
- 2025Position: An Empirically Grounded Identifiability Theory Will Accelerate Self-Supervised Learning Research17 Apr 2025
- 2025Clustering Properties of Self-Supervised Learning30 Jan 2025
- 2024Contrastive Learning Via Equivariant Representation1 Jun 2024
- 2024What Variables Affect Out-of-Distribution Generalization in Pretrained Models?23 May 2024