A Data-Centric Perspective on the Influence of Image Data Quality in Machine Learning Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In machine learning, research has traditionally focused on model development, with relatively less attention paid to training data. As model architectures have matured and marginal gains from further refinements diminish, data quality has emerged as a critical factor. However, systematic studies on evaluating and ensuring dataset quality in the image domain remain limited. This study investigates methods for systematically assessing image dataset quality and examines how various image quality factors influence model performance. Using the publicly available and relatively clean CIFAKE dataset, we identify common quality issues and quantify their impact on training. Building on these findings, we develop a pipeline that integrates two community-developed tools, CleanVision and Fastdup. We analyze their underlying mechanisms and introduce several enhancements, including automatic threshold selection to detect problematic images without manual tuning. Experimental results demonstrate that not all quality issues exert the same level of impact. While convolutional neural networks show resilience to certain distortions, they are particularly vulnerable to degradations that obscure critical visual features, such as blurring and severe downscaling. To assess the performance of existing tools and the effectiveness of our proposed enhancements, we formulate the detection of low-quality images as a binary classification task and use the F1 score as the evaluation metric. Our automatic thresholding method improves the F1 score from 0.6794 to 0.9468 under single perturbations and from 0.7447 to 0.8557 under dual perturbations. For near-duplicate detection, our deduplication strategy increases the F1 score from 0.4576 to 0.7928. These results underscore the effectiveness of our workflow and provide a foundation for advancing data quality assessment in image-based machine learning.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Sep 2025.
Builds on
18 of 35 references.
References · 18
- 2021High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Modelscited by 18,863
- 2016Beyond a Gaussian Denoiser: Residual Learning of Deep CNN for Image Denoisingcited by 1,358
- 2018Albumentations: fast and flexible image augmentationscited by 560
- 2017FFDNet: Toward a Fast and Flexible Solution for CNN based Image Denoisingcited by 510
- 2021Pervasive Label Errors in Test Sets Destabilize Machine Learning Benchmarkscited by 395
- 2023Data-centric Artificial Intelligence: A Surveycited by 203
- 2022Deep Image Deblurring: A Surveycited by 94
- 2022DataPerf: Benchmarks for Data-Centric AI Developmentcited by 90
- 2023CIFAKE: Image Classification and Explainable Identification of AI-Generated Synthetic Imagescited by 84
- 2023Image Denoising: The Deep Learning Revolution and Beyond -- A Survey Paper --cited by 71
- 2020NTIRE 2020 Challenge on Real Image Denoising: Dataset, Methods and Resultscited by 51
- 2023Does CLIP's Generalization Performance Mainly Stem from High Train-Test Similarity?cited by 35
6 more
- 2021A Data Quality-Driven View of MLOpscited by 31
- 2022Data-Centric Artificial Intelligencecited by 31
- 2020A Generalization of Otsu's Method and Minimum Error Thresholdingcited by 16
- 2022Back to the Basics: Revisiting Out-of-Distribution Detection Baselinescited by 16
- 2025Data Quality Matters: Quantifying Image Quality Impact on Machine Learning Performancecited by 5
- 2024How Quality Affects Deep Neural Networks in Fine-Grained Image Classificationcited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.