Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Revisiting Long-tailed Image Classification: Survey and Benchmarks with New Evaluation Metrics

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 2302.01507 v1 pith:KPHUHYWF submitted 2023-02-03 cs.CV

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

Recently, long-tailed image classification harvests lots of research attention, since the data distribution is long-tailed in many real-world situations. Piles of algorithms are devised to address the data imbalance problem by biasing the training process towards less frequent classes. However, they usually evaluate the performance on a balanced testing set or multiple independent testing sets having distinct distributions with the training data. Considering the testing data may have arbitrary distributions, existing evaluation strategies are unable to reflect the actual classification performance objectively. We set up novel evaluation benchmarks based on a series of testing sets with evolving distributions. A corpus of metrics are designed for measuring the accuracy, robustness, and bounds of algorithms for learning with long-tailed distribution. Based on our benchmarks, we re-evaluate the performance of existing methods on CIFAR10 and CIFAR100 datasets, which is valuable for guiding the selection of data rebalancing techniques. We also revisit existing methods and categorize them into four types including data balancing, feature balancing, loss balancing, and prediction balancing, according the focused procedure during the training pipeline.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Why Do Vision Language Models Struggle To Recognize Human Emotions?

    cs.CV 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    VLMs fail at video emotion recognition because they collapse rare emotions into common ones and process frames as an unordered bag; summarizing skipped frames in text partially recovers temporal cues.

Pith tools