mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

How does Labeling Error Impact Contrastive Learning? A Perspective from Data Dimensionality Reduction

arXiv 2507.11161 ↗First posted 15 Jul 2025stat.ML cs.LGcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In recent years, contrastive learning has achieved state-of-the-art performance in the territory of self-supervised representation learning. Many previous works have attempted to provide the theoretical understanding underlying the success of contrastive learning. Almost all of them rely on a default assumption, i.e., the label consistency assumption, which may not hold in practice (the probability of failure is called labeling error) due to the strength and randomness of common augmentation strategies, such as random resized crop (RRC). This paper investigates the theoretical impact of labeling error on the downstream classification performance of contrastive learning. We first reveal several significant negative impacts of labeling error on downstream classification risk. To mitigate these impacts, data dimensionality reduction method (e.g., singular value decomposition, SVD) is applied on original data to reduce false positive samples, and establish both theoretical and empirical evaluations. Moreover, it is also found that SVD acts as a double-edged sword, which may lead to the deterioration of downstream classification accuracy due to the reduced connectivity of the augmentation graph. Based on the above observations, we give the augmentation suggestion that we should use some moderate embedding dimension (such as 512, 1024 in our experiments), data inflation, weak augmentation, and SVD to ensure large graph connectivity and small labeling error to improve model performance.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 45 of its 57 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jul 2025.

Builds on

45 of 57 references.

References · 45

  1. 2020Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Modelscited by 21,076
  2. 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 12,049
  3. 2018Representation Learning with Contrastive Predictive Codingcited by 7,777
  4. 2013Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionalitycited by 3,474
  5. 2020Supervised Contrastive Learningcited by 2,829
  6. 2020Big Self-Supervised Models are Strong Semi-Supervised Learnerscited by 1,380
  7. 2020What Makes for Good Views for Contrastive Learning?cited by 846
  8. 2019A Theoretical Analysis of Contrastive Unsupervised Representation Learningcited by 530
  9. 2021Understanding Dimensional Collapse in Contrastive Self-supervised Learningcited by 378
  10. 2021Provable Guarantees for Self-Supervised Deep Learning with Spectral Contrastive Losscited by 313
  11. 2021Contrastive Learning Inverts the Data Generating Processcited by 221
  12. 2018Tile2Vec: Unsupervised representation learning for spatially distributed datacited by 110
33 more
  1. 2018A Kernel Theory of Modern Data Augmentationcited by 106
  2. 2022Chaos is a Ladder: A New Theoretical Understanding of Contrastive Learning via Augmentation Overlapcited by 105
  3. 2017Unsupervised Learning of Sentence Embeddings using Compositional n-Gram Featurescited by 104
  4. 2021Towards the Generalization of Contrastive Self-Supervised Learningcited by 99
  5. 2022Understanding Contrastive Learning Requires Incorporating Inductive Biasescited by 96
  6. 2023Multimodal Federated Learning via Contrastive Representation Ensemblecited by 86
  7. 2021Weakly Supervised Contrastive Learningcited by 81
  8. 2021ProGCL: Rethinking Hard Negative Mining in Graph Contrastive Learningcited by 72
  9. 2021The Power of Contrast for Feature Learning: A Theoretical Analysiscited by 53
  10. 2023Soft Contrastive Learning for Time Seriescited by 51
  11. 2020On the Generalization Effects of Linear Transformations in Data Augmentationcited by 47
  12. 2022Unbiased Supervised Contrastive Learningcited by 40
  13. 2022Multi-modal Contrastive Representation Learning for Entity Alignmentcited by 38
  14. 2023Connecting Multi-modal Contrastive Representationscited by 36
  15. 2023On the Generalization of Multi-modal Contrastive Learningcited by 30
  16. 2023Generalization Analysis for Contrastive Representation Learningcited by 25
  17. 2024Do Generated Data Always Help Contrastive Learning?cited by 25
  18. 2023Empowering Collaborative Filtering with Principled Adversarial Contrastive Losscited by 24
  19. 2023REBAR: Retrieval-Based Reconstruction for Time-series Contrastive Learningcited by 21
  20. 2023Rethinking the Effect of Data Augmentation in Adversarial Contrastive Learningcited by 20
  21. 2019Does Data Augmentation Lead to Positive Margin?cited by 18
  22. 2023Rethinking Weak Supervision in Helping Contrastive Learningcited by 18
  23. 2022Utilizing Expert Features for Contrastive Learning of Time-Series Representationscited by 17
  24. 2023Efficient Adversarial Contrastive Learning via Robustness-Aware Coreset Selectioncited by 14
  25. 2024Parametric Augmentation for Time Series Contrastive Learningcited by 12
  26. 2023Enhancing Adversarial Contrastive Learning via Adversarial Invariant Regularizationcited by 10
  27. 2022Feature Dropout: Revisiting the Role of Augmentations in Contrastive Learningcited by 9
  28. 2023Spectral Augmentations for Graph Contrastive Learningcited by 8
  29. 2024A Mutual Information Perspective on Federated Contrastive Learningcited by 7
  30. 2022Learning Weakly-Supervised Contrastive Representationscited by 6
  31. 2023Generalization Bounds for Adversarial Contrastive Learningcited by 6
  32. 2023Towards Understanding the Mechanism of Contrastive Learning via Similarity Structure: A Theoretical Analysiscited by 6
  33. 2023Perfect Alignment May be Poisonous to Graph Contrastive Learningcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.