Exploring Human-in-the-Loop Test-Time Adaptation by Synergizing Active Learning and Model Selection
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Existing test-time adaptation (TTA) approaches often adapt models with the unlabeled testing data stream. A recent attempt relaxed the assumption by introducing limited human annotation, referred to as Human-In-the-Loop Test-Time Adaptation (HILTTA) in this study. The focus of existing HILTTA studies lies in selecting the most informative samples to label, a.k.a. active learning. In this work, we are motivated by a pitfall of TTA, i.e. sensitivity to hyper-parameters, and propose to approach HILTTA by synergizing active learning and model selection. Specifically, we first select samples for human annotation (active learning) and then use the labeled data to select optimal hyper-parameters (model selection). To prevent the model selection process from overfitting to local distributions, multiple regularization techniques are employed to complement the validation objective. A sample selection strategy is further tailored by considering the balance between active learning and model selection purposes. We demonstrate on 5 TTA datasets that the proposed HILTTA approach is compatible with off-the-shelf TTA methods and such combinations substantially outperform the state-of-the-art HILTTA methods. Importantly, our proposed method can always prevent choosing the worst hyper-parameters on all off-the-shelf TTA methods. The source code is available at https://github.com/Yushu-Li/HILTTA.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 42 of its 61 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 May 2024.
Builds on
42 of 61 references.
References · 42
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
- 2016Wide Residual Networkscited by 3,070
- 2019Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbationscited by 2,877
- 2016Aggregated Residual Transformations for Deep Neural Networkscited by 2,546
- 2016Learning without Forgettingcited by 2,496
- 2018Dynamic Graph CNN for Learning on Point Cloudscited by 2,223
- 2020FixMatch: Simplifying Semi-Supervised Learning with Consistency and Confidencecited by 2,085
- 2014Unsupervised Domain Adaptation by Backpropagationcited by 1,917
- 2018DARTS: Differentiable Architecture Searchcited by 1,798
- 2018Moment Matching for Multi-Source Domain Adaptationcited by 1,331
- 2020Do We Really Need to Access the Source Data? Source Hypothesis Transfer for Unsupervised Domain Adaptationcited by 848
- 2017Deep Bayesian Active Learning with Image Datacited by 819
30 more
- 2020RobustBench: a standardized adversarial robustness benchmarkcited by 661
- 2019Deep Batch Active Learning by Diverse, Uncertain Gradient Lower Boundscited by 610
- 2022Continual Test-Time Domain Adaptationcited by 525
- 2019Pseudo-Labeling and Confirmation Bias in Deep Semi-Supervised Learningcited by 510
- 2022Efficient Test-Time Model Adaptation without Forgettingcited by 469
- 2023Towards Stable Test-Time Adaptation in Dynamic Wild Worldcited by 415
- 2017Measuring Catastrophic Forgetting in Neural Networkscited by 360
- 2023Robust Test-Time Adaptation in Dynamic Scenarioscited by 189
- 2020On Hyperparameter Optimization of Machine Learning Algorithms: Theory and Practicecited by 182
- 2021Generalized Source-free Domain Adaptationcited by 175
- 2020Source Data-absent Unsupervised Domain Adaptation through Hypothesis Transfer and Labeling Transfercited by 173
- 2022NOTE: Robust Continual Test-time Adaptation Against Temporal Correlationcited by 151
- 2022Robust Mean Teacher for Continual and Gradual Test-Time Adaptationcited by 104
- 2019Generalized Inner Loop Meta-Learningcited by 93
- 2021Active Testing: Sample-Efficient Model Evaluationcited by 82
- 2022Benchmarking Robustness of 3D Point Cloud Recognition Against Common Corruptionscited by 80
- 2017Minimal-Entropy Correlation Alignment for Unsupervised Deep Domain Adaptationcited by 71
- 2023Universal Test-time Adaptation through Weight Ensembling, Diversity Weighting, and Prior Correctioncited by 65
- 2022Test-Time Adaptation via Self-Training with Nearest Neighbor Informationcited by 64
- 2023On Pitfalls of Test-Time Adaptationcited by 64
- 2023RDumb: A simple approach that questions our progress in continual test-time adaptationcited by 53
- 2022Revisiting Realistic Test-Time Training: Sequential Inference and Adaptation by Anchored Clusteringcited by 44
- 2023Feature Alignment and Uniformity for Test Time Adaptationcited by 42
- 2023On the Robustness of Open-World Test-Time Training: Self-Training with Dynamic Prototype Expansioncited by 34
- 2023Towards Real-World Test-Time Adaptation: Tri-Net Self-Training with Balanced Normalizationcited by 34
- 2022Active Surrogate Estimators: An Active Learning Approach to Label-Efficient Model Evaluationcited by 26
- 2023Streaming Active Learning with Deep Neural Networkscited by 20
- 2023Revisiting Realistic Test-Time Training: Sequential Inference and Adaptation by Anchored Clustering Regularized Self-Trainingcited by 19
- 2024Active Test-Time Adaptation: Theoretical Analyses and An Algorithmcited by 18
- 2023STFAR: Improving Object Detection Robustness at Test-Time by Self-Training with Feature Alignment Regularizationcited by 13
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.