Pith. sign in

Do CIFAR-10 Classifiers Generalize to CIFAR-10?

11 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.

11 Pith papers citing it
abstract

Machine learning is currently dominated by largely experimental work focused on improvements in a few key tasks. However, the impressive accuracy numbers of the best performing models are questionable because the same test sets have been used to select these models for multiple years now. To understand the danger of overfitting, we measure the accuracy of CIFAR-10 classifiers by creating a new test set of truly unseen images. Although we ensure that the new test set is as close to the original data distribution as possible, we find a large drop in accuracy (4% to 10%) for a broad range of deep learning models. Yet more recent models with higher original accuracy show a smaller drop and better overall performance, indicating that this drop is likely not due to overfitting based on adaptivity. Instead, we view our results as evidence that current accuracy numbers are brittle and susceptible to even minute natural variations in the data distribution.

representative citing papers

Encrypted Neural Networks without Overflows

cs.CR · 2026-05-21 · unverdicted · novelty 6.0

Introduces formal verification to compute certified neuron range bounds for CKKS-encrypted neural networks, eliminating overflow failures that previously reached 47%.

Reproducibility in Machine Learning for Health

cs.LG · 2019-07-02 · unverdicted · novelty 5.0

Systematic evaluation of over 100 ML4H papers finds poorer reproducibility than other ML fields, driven by limited data and code access, and offers recommendations to data providers, publishers, and researchers.

citing papers explorer

Showing 11 of 11 citing papers.