mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Clarifying Myths About the Relationship Between Shape Bias, Accuracy, and Robustness

arXiv 2406.05006 ↗First posted 7 Jun 2024cs.CVcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Deep learning models can perform well when evaluated on images from the same distribution as the training set. However, applying small perturbations in the forms of noise, artifacts, occlusions, blurring, etc. to a model's input image and feeding the model with out-of-distribution (OOD) data can significantly drop the model's accuracy, making it not applicable to real-world scenarios. Data augmentation is one of the well-practiced methods to improve model robustness against OOD data; however, examining which augmentation type to choose and how it affects the OOD robustness remains understudied. There is a growing belief that augmenting datasets using data augmentations that improve a model's bias to shape-based features rather than texture-based features results in increased OOD robustness for Convolutional Neural Networks trained on the ImageNet-1K dataset. This is usually stated as ``an increase in the model's shape bias results in an increase in its OOD robustness". Based on this hypothesis, some works in the literature aim to find augmentations with higher effects on model shape bias and use those for data augmentation. By evaluating 39 types of data augmentations on a widely used OOD dataset, we demonstrate the impact of each data augmentation on the model's robustness to OOD data and further show that the mentioned hypothesis is not true; an increase in shape bias does not necessarily result in higher OOD robustness. By analyzing the results, we also find some biases in the ImageNet-1K dataset that can easily be reduced using proper data augmentation. Our evaluation results further show that there is not necessarily a trade-off between in-domain accuracy and OOD robustness, and choosing the proper augmentations can help increase both in-domain accuracy and OOD robustness simultaneously.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jun 2024.

Builds on

20 of 28 references.

References · 20

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 29,915
  3. 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
  4. 2018ImageNet-trained CNNs are biased towards texture; increasing shape bias improves accuracy and robustnesscited by 1,430
  5. 2017Adversarial Discriminative Domain Adaptationcited by 1,309
  6. 2016Adversarial Machine Learning at Scalecited by 934
  7. 2018AutoAugment: Learning Augmentation Policies from Datacited by 728
  8. 2018Albumentations: fast and flexible image augmentationscited by 558
  9. 2019Using Self-Supervised Learning Can Improve Model Robustness and Uncertaintycited by 511
  10. 2021Intriguing Properties of Vision Transformerscited by 446
  11. 2021Partial success in closing the gap between human and machine visioncited by 185
  12. 2020Adversarial Robustness: From Self-Supervised Pre-Training to Fine-Tuningcited by 152
8 more
  1. 2018Effects of Degradations on Deep Neural Network Architecturescited by 47
  2. 2021Pyramid Adversarial Training Improves ViT Performancecited by 39
  3. 2022AugLy: Data Augmentations for Robustnesscited by 34
  4. 2021Does enhanced shape bias improve neural network robustness to common corruptions?cited by 32
  5. 2017On Classification of Distorted Images with Deep Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 26
  6. 2019A Direct Approach to Robust Deep Learning Using Adversarial Networkscited by 18
  7. 2017DeepCorrect: Correcting DNN models against Image Distortionscited by 14
  8. 2020Adversarial Feature Desensitizationcited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.

1 paper.