Generative Cross-Entropy: A Strictly Proper Loss for Data-Efficient Classification
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Cross-entropy (CE) is the default training loss for supervised classification, but its sample efficiency is limited when labels are scarce. Existing remedies primarily act on the data side, via augmentation, synthesis, or transfer from pretrained models; the training objective itself is rarely revisited. We revisit it here. Drawing on the classical observation that generative classifiers reach their asymptotic error with fewer samples than discriminative ones, we propose Generative Cross-Entropy (GenCE), a drop-in replacement for CE that introduces a generative learning principle into a standard discriminative network without altering the architecture or fitting a separate density model. GenCE follows from a Bayesian rewrite of the class-conditional likelihood and, in the mini-batch approximation, reduces to normalizing each sample's softmax score against the model's predictions on the batch, coupling the training signal across examples sharing a class. We extend the proper-scoring-rule framework to such non-local losses and prove that GenCE is strictly proper under a mild completeness condition: its population risk is uniquely minimized at the true posterior. Across three datasets, on two architectures and in both balanced small-data and class-imbalanced regimes, GenCE outperforms CE and other widely used losses, while also producing better-calibrated probabilities and stronger out-of-distribution detection.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Apr 2026.
Builds on
29 of 46 references.
References · 29
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
- 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,364
- 2017mixup: Beyond Empirical Risk Minimizationcited by 5,183
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2019CutMix: Regularization Strategy to Train Strong Classifiers with Localizable Featurescited by 2,884
- 2020Supervised Contrastive Learningcited by 2,829
- 2016A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networkscited by 2,385
- 2019RandAugment: Practical automated data augmentation with a reduced search spacecited by 2,269
- 2016Matching Networks for One Shot Learningcited by 2,255
- 2019Class-Balanced Loss Based on Effective Number of Samplescited by 1,245
- 2018Generalized Cross Entropy Loss for Training Deep Neural Networks with Noisy Labelscited by 997
- 2019When Does Label Smoothing Help?cited by 988
17 more
- 2020Long-tail learning via logit adjustmentcited by 618
- 2019Your Classifier is Secretly an Energy Based Model and You Should Treat it Like Onecited by 405
- 2020Calibrating Deep Neural Networks using Focal Losscited by 357
- 2018Meta-Transfer Learning for Few-Shot Learningcited by 306
- 2018MixUp as Locally Linear Out-Of-Manifold Regularizationcited by 158
- 2020Evaluation of Neural Architectures Trained with Square Loss vs Cross-Entropy in Classification Taskscited by 138
- 2021An Introduction to Deep Generative Modelingcited by 104
- 2021AutoMix: Unveiling the Power of Mixup for Stronger Classifierscited by 69
- 2019Robust Inference via Generative Classifiers for Handling Noisy Labelscited by 68
- 2023Advances and Challenges in Meta-Learning: A Technical Reviewcited by 65
- 2017Label Efficient Learning of Transferable Representations across Domains and Taskscited by 49
- 2018Are Generative Classifiers More Robust to Adversarial Attacks?cited by 36
- 2017Low-shot learning with large-scale diffusioncited by 33
- 2023Dual Focal Loss for Calibrationcited by 33
- 2022AdaFocal: Calibration-aware Adaptive Focal Losscited by 32
- 2023Revisiting Discriminative vs. Generative Classifiers: Theory and Implicationscited by 29
- 2023Label-Efficient Deep Learning in Medical Image Analysis: Challenges and Future Directionscited by 16
Built on by
Not cited yet.