mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The Impact of the Single-Label Assumption in Image Recognition Benchmarking

arXiv 2412.18409 ↗First posted 24 Dec 2024cs.CVcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Deep neural networks (DNNs) are typically evaluated under the assumption that each image has a single correct label. However, many images in benchmarks like ImageNet contain multiple valid labels, creating a mismatch between evaluation protocols and the actual complexity of visual data. This mismatch can penalize DNNs for predicting correct but unannotated labels, which may partly explain reported accuracy drops, such as the widely cited 11 to 14 percent top-1 accuracy decline on ImageNetV2, a replication test set for ImageNet. This raises the question: do such drops reflect genuine generalization failures or artifacts of restrictive evaluation metrics? We rigorously assess the impact of multi-label characteristics on reported accuracy gaps. To evaluate the multi-label prediction capability (MLPC) of single-label-trained models, we introduce a variable top-k evaluation, where k matches the number of valid labels per image. Applied to 315 ImageNet-trained models, our analyses demonstrate that conventional top-1 accuracy disproportionately penalizes valid but secondary predictions. We also propose Aggregate Subgroup Model Accuracy (ASMA) to better capture multi-label performance across model subgroups. Our results reveal wide variability in MLPC, with some models consistently ranking multiple correct labels higher. Under this evaluation, the perceived gap between ImageNet and ImageNetV2 narrows substantially. To further isolate multi-label recognition performance from contextual cues, we introduce PatchML, a synthetic dataset containing systematically combined object patches. PatchML demonstrates that many models trained with single-label supervision nonetheless recognize multiple objects. Altogether, these findings highlight limitations in single-label evaluation and reveal that modern DNNs have stronger multi-label capabilities than standard metrics suggest.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Dec 2024.

Builds on

33 of 44 references.

References · 33

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  3. 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 29,915
  4. 2021Swin Transformer: Hierarchical Vision Transformer using Shifted Windowscited by 12,082
  5. 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,441
  6. 2020Training data-efficient image transformers & distillation through attentioncited by 4,560
  7. 2017MobileNets: Efficient Convolutional Neural Networks for Mobile Vision Applicationscited by 3,827
  8. 2022A ConvNet for the 2020scited by 3,545
  9. 2019CutMix: Regularization Strategy to Train Strong Classifiers with Localizable Featurescited by 2,875
  10. 2021BEiT: BERT Pre-Training of Image Transformerscited by 2,360
  11. 2019Do ImageNet Classifiers Generalize to ImageNet?cited by 1,507
  12. 2020Designing Network Design Spacescited by 954
21 more
  1. 2021Going deeper with Image Transformerscited by 759
  2. 2023ConvNeXt V2: Co-designing and Scaling ConvNets with Masked Autoencoderscited by 703
  3. 2018Exploring the Limits of Weakly Supervised Pretrainingcited by 604
  4. 2021Pervasive Label Errors in Test Sets Destabilize Machine Learning Benchmarkscited by 388
  5. 2020Are we done with ImageNet?cited by 329
  6. 2022BEiT v2: Masked Image Modeling with Vector-Quantized Visual Tokenizerscited by 298
  7. 2021VOLO: Vision Outlooker for Visual Recognitioncited by 164
  8. 2021All Tokens Matter: Token Labeling for Training Better Vision Transformerscited by 144
  9. 2021Re-labeling ImageNet: from Single to Multi-Labels, from Global to Localized Labelscited by 117
  10. 2022Revisiting Weakly Supervised Pre-Training of Visual Perception Modelscited by 116
  11. 2020From ImageNet to Image Classification: Contextualizing Progress on Benchmarkscited by 90
  12. 2021Multi-Label Learning from Single Positive Labelscited by 81
  13. 2022When does dough become a bagel? Analyzing the remaining mistakes on ImageNetcited by 60
  14. 2015DeepFix: A Fully Convolutional Neural Network for predicting Human Eye Fixationscited by 47
  15. 2023ImageNet-Hard: The Hardest Images Remaining from a Study of the Power of Zoom and Spatial Biases in Image Classificationcited by 33
  16. 2020Identifying Statistical Bias in Dataset Replicationcited by 24
  17. 2022Bugs in the Data: How ImageNet Misrepresents Biodiversitycited by 24
  18. 2018End-to-End Saliency Mapping via Probability Distribution Predictioncited by 17
  19. 2022Spatial Consistency Loss for Training Multi-Label Classifiers from Single-Label Annotationscited by 17
  20. 2023Automated Classification of Model Errors on ImageNetcited by 6
  21. 2024Leveraging Human-Machine Interactions for Computer Vision Dataset Quality Enhancementcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.

1 paper.