mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

Enhanced Sample Selection with Confidence Tracking: Identifying Correctly Labeled yet Hard-to-Learn Samples in Noisy Data

arXiv 2504.17474 ↗First posted 24 Apr 2025cs.CV cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We propose a novel sample selection method for image classification in the presence of noisy labels. Existing methods typically consider small-loss samples as correctly labeled. However, some correctly labeled samples are inherently difficult for the model to learn and can exhibit high loss similar to mislabeled samples in the early stages of training. Consequently, setting a threshold on per-sample loss to select correct labels results in a trade-off between precision and recall in sample selection: a lower threshold may miss many correctly labeled hard-to-learn samples (low recall), while a higher threshold may include many mislabeled samples (low precision). To address this issue, our goal is to accurately distinguish correctly labeled yet hard-to-learn samples from mislabeled ones, thus alleviating the trade-off dilemma. We achieve this by considering the trends in model prediction confidence rather than relying solely on loss values. Empirical observations show that only for correctly labeled samples, the model's prediction confidence for the annotated labels typically increases faster than for any other classes. Based on this insight, we propose tracking the confidence gaps between the annotated labels and other classes during training and evaluating their trends using the Mann-Kendall Test. A sample is considered potentially correctly labeled if all its confidence gaps tend to increase. Our method functions as a plug-and-play component that can be seamlessly integrated into existing sample selection techniques. Experiments on several standard benchmarks and real-world datasets demonstrate that our method enhances the performance of existing methods for learning with noisy labels.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 45 of its 65 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Apr 2025.

Builds on

45 of 65 references.

References · 45

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,950
  2. 2015Rethinking the Inception Architecture for Computer Visioncited by 5,457
  3. 2017mixup: Beyond Empirical Risk Minimizationcited by 5,170
  4. 2016Identity Mappings in Deep Residual Networkscited by 1,962
  5. 2016Inception-v4, Inception-ResNet and the Impact of Residual Connections on Learningcited by 1,512
  6. 2018Co-teaching: Robust Training of Deep Neural Networks with Extremely Noisy Labelscited by 1,055
  7. 2018Generalized Cross Entropy Loss for Training Deep Neural Networks with Noisy Labelscited by 997
  8. 2017A Closer Look at Memorization in Deep Networkscited by 939
  9. 2020DivideMix: Learning with Noisy Labels as Semi-supervised Learningcited by 692
  10. 2019Symmetric Cross Entropy for Robust Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 500
  11. 2017Robust Loss Functions under Label Noise for Deep Neural Networkscited by 443
  12. 2020Early-Learning Regularization Prevents Memorization of Noisy Labelscited by 415
33 more
  1. 2019How does Disagreement Help Generalization against Label Corruption?cited by 390
  2. 2014Training Deep Neural Networks on Noisy Labels with Bootstrappingcited by 322
  3. 2018Joint Optimization Framework for Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 293
  4. 2020Combating noisy labels by agreement: A joint training method with co-regularizationcited by 289
  5. 2017WebVision Database: Visual Learning and Understanding from Web Datacited by 262
  6. 2020Identifying Mislabeled Data using the Area Under the Margin Rankingcited by 260
  7. 2020Normalized Loss Functions for Deep Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 257
  8. 2021Learning with Noisy Labels Revisited: A Study Using Real-World Human Annotationscited by 255
  9. 2018Using Trusted Data to Train Deep Networks on Labels Corrupted by Severe Noisecited by 216
  10. 2019Probabilistic End-to-end Noise Correction for Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 210
  11. 2017CleanNet: Transfer Learning for Scalable Image Classifier Training with Label Noisecited by 181
  12. 2020Learning with Instance-Dependent Label Noise: A Sample Sieve Approachcited by 158
  13. 2019Peer Loss Functions: Learning from Noisy Labels without Knowing Noise Ratescited by 142
  14. 2020Dual T: Reducing Estimation Error for Transition Matrix in Label-noise Learningcited by 142
  15. 2021Understanding and Improving Early Stopping for Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 112
  16. 2021Augmentation Strategies for Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 86
  17. 2021FINE Samples for Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 82
  18. 2020A Topological Filter for Learning with Label Noisecited by 76
  19. 2021Generalized Jensen-Shannon Divergence Loss for Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 74
  20. 2021To Smooth or Not? When Label Smoothing Meets Noisy Labelscited by 70
  21. 2020Confidence Scores Make Instance-dependent Label-noise Learning Possiblecited by 63
  22. 2022Learning with Neighbor Consistency for Noisy Labelscited by 55
  23. 2021Instance-dependent Label-noise Learning under a Structural Causal Modelcited by 50
  24. 2022Instance-Dependent Label-Noise Learning with Manifold-Regularized Transition Matrix Estimationcited by 49
  25. 2021Asymmetric Loss Functions for Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 46
  26. 2022Investigating Why Contrastive Learning Benefits Robustness Against Label Noisecited by 46
  27. 2020When Optimizing f-divergence is Robust with Label Noisecited by 44
  28. 2020Coherent Gradients: An Approach to Understanding Generalization in Gradient Descent-based Optimizationcited by 41
  29. 2020Coresets for Robust Training of Neural Networks against Noisy Labelscited by 24
  30. 2022Centrality and Consistency: Two-Stage Clean Samples Identification for Learning with Instance-Dependent Noisy Labelscited by 16
  31. 2023Transferring Annotator- and Instance-dependent Transition Matrix for Learning from Crowdscited by 11
  32. 2022Learning from Training Dynamics: Identifying Mislabeled Data Beyond Manually Designed Featurescited by 9
  33. 2024Personalized Topic Selection Model for Topic-Grounded Dialoguecited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 13 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.