Label Convergence: Defining an Upper Performance Bound in Object Recognition through Contradictory Annotations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Annotation errors are a challenge not only during training of machine learning models, but also during their evaluation. Label variations and inaccuracies in datasets often manifest as contradictory examples that deviate from established labeling conventions. Such inconsistencies, when significant, prevent models from achieving optimal performance on metrics such as mean Average Precision (mAP). We introduce the notion of "label convergence" to describe the highest achievable performance under the constraint of contradictory test annotations, essentially defining an upper bound on model accuracy. Recognizing that noise is an inherent characteristic of all data, our study analyzes five real-world datasets, including the LVIS dataset, to investigate the phenomenon of label convergence. We approximate that label convergence is between 62.63-67.52 mAP@[0.5:0.95:0.05] for LVIS with 95% confidence, attributing these bounds to the presence of real annotation errors. With current state-of-the-art (SOTA) models at the upper end of the label convergence interval for the well-studied LVIS dataset, we conclude that model capacity is sufficient to solve current object detection problems. Therefore, future efforts should focus on three key aspects: (1) updating the problem specification and adjusting evaluation practices to account for unavoidable label noise, (2) creating cleaner data, especially test data, and (3) including multi-annotated data to investigate annotation variation and make these issues visible from the outset.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Sep 2024.
Builds on
26 of 47 references.
References · 26
- 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,498
- 2019LVIS: A Dataset for Large Vocabulary Instance Segmentationcited by 1,215
- 2017Revisiting Unreasonable Effectiveness of Data in Deep Learning Eracited by 916
- 2020Learning from Noisy Labels with Deep Neural Networks: A Surveycited by 580
- 2018The Open Images Dataset V4: Unified image classification, object detection, and visual relationship detection at scalecited by 542
- 2021Pervasive Label Errors in Test Sets Destabilize Machine Learning Benchmarkscited by 388
- 2022DETRs with Collaborative Hybrid Assignments Trainingcited by 273
- 2020VinDr-CXR: An open dataset of chest X-rays with radiologist's annotationscited by 236
- 2022The 'Problem' of Human Label Variation: On Ground Truth in Data, Modeling and Evaluationcited by 133
- 2019Learning From Noisy Labels By Regularized Estimation Of Annotator Confusioncited by 126
- 2019Learning from Noisy Anchors for One-stage Object Detectioncited by 35
- 2020Large-Scale Object Detection in the Wild from Imbalanced Multi-Labelscited by 35
14 more
- 2020Towards Noise-resistant Object Detection with Noisy Annotationscited by 24
- 2022Robust Object Detection With Inaccurate Bounding Boxescited by 20
- 2019Training Object Detectors With Noisy Datacited by 19
- 2023Identifying Label Errors in Object Detection Datasets by Loss Inspectioncited by 16
- 2022Learning from Multiple Expert Annotators for Enhancing Anomaly Detection in Medical Image Analysiscited by 13
- 2019Empirical Upper Bound in Object Detection and Morecited by 12
- 2024Don't Blame the Data, Blame the Model: Understanding Noise and Bias When Learning from Subjective Annotationscited by 10
- 2021Noisy Annotation Refinement for Object Detectioncited by 9
- 2019Handling Inter-Annotator Agreement for Automated Skin Lesion Segmentationcited by 8
- 2022An Accurate and Explainable Deep Learning System Improves Interobserver Agreement in the Interpretation of Chest Radiographcited by 7
- 2019Assessing Data Quality of Annotations with Krippendorff Alpha For Applications in Computer Visioncited by 5
- 2023Improving Object Detection in Medical Image Analysis through Multiple Expert Annotators: An Empirical Investigationcited by 1
- 2023Drawing the Same Bounding Box Twice? Coping Noisy Annotations in Object Detection with Repeated Labelscited by 1
- 2024NoiseBench: Benchmarking the Impact of Real Label Noise on Named Entity Recognitioncited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 4.
5 papers.
- 2026TMI: Text-to-Image Meets Image-to-Image for Complementary Data Synthesis to Boost Long-Tailed Instance Segmentationcited by 1
- 2025CISOL: An Open and Extensible Dataset for Table Structure Recognition in the Construction Industrycited by 0
- 2026IndoorCrowd: A Multi-Scene Dataset for Human Detection, Segmentation, and Tracking with an Automated Annotation Pipelinecited by 0
- 2026Calibrating Probabilistic Object Detectors with Annotator Disagreementcited by 0
- 2026Analyzing Training-Free Corruption Detection for Object Detection Datasetscited by 0
- 2026TMI: Text-to-Image Meets Image-to-Image for Complementary Data Synthesis to Boost Long-Tailed Instance Segmentation9 Jul 2026
- 2026Analyzing Training-Free Corruption Detection for Object Detection Datasets9 Jun 2026
- 2026Calibrating Probabilistic Object Detectors with Annotator Disagreement23 May 2026
- 2026IndoorCrowd: A Multi-Scene Dataset for Human Detection, Segmentation, and Tracking with an Automated Annotation Pipeline2 Apr 2026
- 2025CISOL: An Open and Extensible Dataset for Table Structure Recognition in the Construction Industry26 Jan 2025