Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Coverage-centric Coreset Selection for High Pruning Rates

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 2210.15809 v2 pith:XYGCZUEM submitted 2022-10-28 cs.LG cs.AI

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

One-shot coreset selection aims to select a representative subset of the training data, given a pruning rate, that can later be used to train future models while retaining high accuracy. State-of-the-art coreset selection methods pick the highest importance examples based on an importance metric and are found to perform well at low pruning rates. However, at high pruning rates, they suffer from a catastrophic accuracy drop, performing worse than even random sampling. This paper explores the reasons behind this accuracy drop both theoretically and empirically. We first propose a novel metric to measure the coverage of a dataset on a specific distribution by extending the classical geometric set cover problem to a distribution cover problem. This metric helps explain why coresets selected by SOTA methods at high pruning rates perform poorly compared to random sampling because of worse data coverage. We then propose a novel one-shot coreset selection method, Coverage-centric Coreset Selection (CCS), that jointly considers overall data coverage upon a distribution as well as the importance of each example. We evaluate CCS on five datasets and show that, at high pruning rates (e.g., 90%), it achieves significantly better accuracy than previous SOTA methods (e.g., at least 19.56% higher on CIFAR10) as well as random selection (e.g., 7.04% higher on CIFAR10) and comparable accuracy at low pruning rates. We make our code publicly available at https://github.com/haizhongzheng/Coverage-centric-coreset-selection.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Differential-informed Sample Selection Accelerates Multimodal Contrastive Learning

    cs.CV 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    DISSect selects training samples for multimodal contrastive learning by ranking the difference between historical and current model similarity scores, matching full-data performance with 70% fewer samples.

  2. Foundation Model Insights and a Multi-Model Approach for Superior Fine-Grained One-shot Subset Selection

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RAM-APL combines distance rankings and pseudo-class label accuracy from two foundation models to select training subsets, outperforming twelve baselines on fine-grained image datasets.

  3. Extending Dataset Pruning to Object Detection: A Variance-based Approach

    cs.CV 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A variance-based prediction score using IoU and confidence fluctuations across epochs improves dataset pruning for object detection over several baselines.

  4. A Coreset Selection Framework with Ensemble Aggregation for Image Classification

    cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    SCOSS stratified sampling over class-centroid scores, with optional class balance and ensemble averaging, matches or beats random and moderate coresets for SGC and SVM at 2.5–20% sampling ratios.

Pith tools