REVIEW 1 cited by
A Theoretical Analysis of the Number of Shots in Few-Shot Learning
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
A Theoretical Analysis of the Number of Shots in Few-Shot Learning
read the original abstract
Few-shot classification is the task of predicting the category of an example from a set of few labeled examples. The number of labeled examples per category is called the number of shots (or shot number). Recent works tackle this task through meta-learning, where a meta-learner extracts information from observed tasks during meta-training to quickly adapt to new tasks during meta-testing. In this formulation, the number of shots exploited during meta-training has an impact on the recognition performance at meta-test time. Generally, the shot number used in meta-training should match the one used in meta-testing to obtain the best performance. We introduce a theoretical analysis of the impact of the shot number on Prototypical Networks, a state-of-the-art few-shot classification method. From our analysis, we propose a simple method that is robust to the choice of shot number used during meta-training, which is a crucial hyperparameter. The performance of our model trained for an arbitrary meta-training shot number shows great performance for different values of meta-testing shot numbers. We experimentally demonstrate our approach on different few-shot classification benchmarks.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
CCoMAML: Efficient Cattle Identification Using Cooperative Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning
CCoMAML, a Cooperative MAML variant with a CNN co-learner, reports strong few-shot cattle identification from muzzle images, but its test-set-tuned hyperparameters and best-split reporting weaken the result.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.