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
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.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Why Do Vision Language Models Struggle To Recognize Human Emotions?
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.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.