REVIEW 1 cited by
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
Data Augmentation Revisited: Rethinking the Distribution Gap between Clean and Augmented Data
read the original abstract
Data augmentation has been widely applied as an effective methodology to improve generalization in particular when training deep neural networks. Recently, researchers proposed a few intensive data augmentation techniques, which indeed improved accuracy, yet we notice that these methods augment data have also caused a considerable gap between clean and augmented data. In this paper, we revisit this problem from an analytical perspective, for which we estimate the upper-bound of expected risk using two terms, namely, empirical risk and generalization error, respectively. We develop an understanding of data augmentation as regularization, which highlights the major features. As a result, data augmentation significantly reduces the generalization error, but meanwhile leads to a slightly higher empirical risk. On the assumption that data augmentation helps models converge to a better region, the model can benefit from a lower empirical risk achieved by a simple method, i.e., using less-augmented data to refine the model trained on fully-augmented data. Our approach achieves consistent accuracy gain on a few standard image classification benchmarks, and the gain transfers to object detection.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Assessing the Operational Impact of Poisoning Attacks over Augmented 3D Point Cloud Public Datasets for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles
GAN-based augmentation of poisoned 3D point cloud datasets amplifies attack effectiveness, increasing misclassification and operational impact on CAV decision-making by up to 3x compared to non-augmented baselines.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.