Pearls from Pebbles: Improved Confidence Functions for Auto-labeling
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Auto-labeling is an important family of techniques that produce labeled training sets with minimum manual labeling. A prominent variant, threshold-based auto-labeling (TBAL), works by finding a threshold on a model's confidence scores above which it can accurately label unlabeled data points. However, many models are known to produce overconfident scores, leading to poor TBAL performance. While a natural idea is to apply off-the-shelf calibration methods to alleviate the overconfidence issue, such methods still fall short. Rather than experimenting with ad-hoc choices of confidence functions, we propose a framework for studying the optimal TBAL confidence function. We develop a tractable version of the framework to obtain textttColander (Confidence functions for Efficient and Reliable Auto-labeling), a new post-hoc method specifically designed to maximize performance in TBAL systems. We perform an extensive empirical evaluation of our method textttColander and compare it against methods designed for calibration. textttColander achieves up to 60% improvements on coverage over the baselines while maintaining auto-labeling error below 5% and using the same amount of labeled data as the baselines.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 78 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Apr 2024.
Builds on
33 of 78 references.
References · 33
- 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,155
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2016A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networkscited by 2,385
- 2020Sharpness-Aware Minimization for Efficiently Improving Generalizationcited by 1,417
- 2019When Does Label Smoothing Help?cited by 988
- 2017Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networkscited by 852
- 2014Deep Neural Networks are Easily Fooled: High Confidence Predictions for Unrecognizable Imagescited by 776
- 2021A Survey of Uncertainty in Deep Neural Networkscited by 680
- 2019Beyond temperature scaling: Obtaining well-calibrated multiclass probabilities with Dirichlet calibrationcited by 364
- 2020Calibrating Deep Neural Networks using Focal Losscited by 357
21 more
- 2018Why ReLU networks yield high-confidence predictions far away from the training data and how to mitigate the problemcited by 323
- 2019Verified Uncertainty Calibrationcited by 309
- 2016Data Programming: Creating Large Training Sets, Quicklycited by 246
- 2019Addressing Failure Prediction by Learning Model Confidencecited by 186
- 2020Confidence-Aware Learning for Deep Neural Networkscited by 113
- 2020Fast and Three-rious: Speeding Up Weak Supervision with Triplet Methodscited by 98
- 2020Fine-Tuning Pre-trained Language Model with Weak Supervision: A Contrastive-Regularized Self-Training Approachcited by 83
- 2018Practical Obstacles to Deploying Active Learningcited by 68
- 2022Sample-dependent Adaptive Temperature Scaling for Improved Calibrationcited by 48
- 2021Top-label calibration and multiclass-to-binary reductionscited by 46
- 2021Distribution-free calibration guarantees for histogram binning without sample splittingcited by 45
- 2023Rethinking Confidence Calibration for Failure Predictioncited by 43
- 2021Don't Just Blame Over-parametrization for Over-confidence: Theoretical Analysis of Calibration in Binary Classificationcited by 39
- 2017Clustering with Noisy Queriescited by 34
- 2021Universalizing Weak Supervisioncited by 27
- 2022Lifting Weak Supervision To Structured Predictioncited by 10
- 2023Weaker Than You Think: A Critical Look at Weakly Supervised Learningcited by 8
- 2022Promises and Pitfalls of Threshold-based Auto-labelingcited by 6
- 2023Cut your Losses with Squentropycited by 6
- 2020MCAL: Minimum Cost Human-Machine Active Labelingcited by 3
- 2023Mitigating Source Bias for Fairer Weak Supervisioncited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 1.
3 papers.
- 2025Exact Reformulation and Optimization for Direct Metric Optimization in Binary Imbalanced Classificationcited by 2
- 2025ASAT: Adaptive Scoring and Thresholding with Human Feedback for Robust Out-of-Distribution Detectioncited by 1
- 2026Structured Exploration and Exploitation of Label Functions for Automated Data Annotationcited by 1
- 2026Structured Exploration and Exploitation of Label Functions for Automated Data Annotation28 Mar 2026
- 2025Exact Reformulation and Optimization for Direct Metric Optimization in Binary Imbalanced Classification21 Jul 2025
- 2025ASAT: Adaptive Scoring and Thresholding with Human Feedback for Robust Out-of-Distribution Detection5 May 2025