Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Learning to Detect Label Errors by Making Them: A Method for Segmentation and Object Detection Datasets

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2508.17930 v1 pith:3GB3B7H5 submitted 2025-08-25 cs.LG cs.CV

classification cs.LGcs.CV
keywords labelerrorsdetectiondatasetssegmentationerrorlearningmethod
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recently, detection of label errors and improvement of label quality in datasets for supervised learning tasks has become an increasingly important goal in both research and industry. The consequences of incorrectly annotated data include reduced model performance, biased benchmark results, and lower overall accuracy. Current state-of-the-art label error detection methods often focus on a single computer vision task and, consequently, a specific type of dataset, containing, for example, either bounding boxes or pixel-wise annotations. Furthermore, previous methods are not learning-based. In this work, we overcome this research gap. We present a unified method for detecting label errors in object detection, semantic segmentation, and instance segmentation datasets. In a nutshell, our approach - learning to detect label errors by making them - works as follows: we inject different kinds of label errors into the ground truth. Then, the detection of label errors, across all mentioned primary tasks, is framed as an instance segmentation problem based on a composite input. In our experiments, we compare the label error detection performance of our method with various baselines and state-of-the-art approaches of each task's domain on simulated label errors across multiple tasks, datasets, and base models. This is complemented by a generalization study on real-world label errors. Additionally, we release 459 real label errors identified in the Cityscapes dataset and provide a benchmark for real label error detection in Cityscapes.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools