REVIEW 1 cited by
ConvNet vs Transformer, Supervised vs CLIP: Beyond ImageNet Accuracy
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
ConvNet vs Transformer, Supervised vs CLIP: Beyond ImageNet Accuracy
read the original abstract
Modern computer vision offers a great variety of models to practitioners, and selecting a model from multiple options for specific applications can be challenging. Conventionally, competing model architectures and training protocols are compared by their classification accuracy on ImageNet. However, this single metric does not fully capture performance nuances critical for specialized tasks. In this work, we conduct an in-depth comparative analysis of model behaviors beyond ImageNet accuracy, for both ConvNet and Vision Transformer architectures, each across supervised and CLIP training paradigms. Although our selected models have similar ImageNet accuracies and compute requirements, we find that they differ in many other aspects: types of mistakes, output calibration, transferability, and feature invariance, among others. This diversity in model characteristics, not captured by traditional metrics, highlights the need for more nuanced analysis when choosing among different models. Our code is available at https://github.com/kirill-vish/Beyond-INet.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Image Recognition with Vision and Language Embeddings of VLMs
A benchmark of dual-encoder VLMs finds text and image embeddings give complementary class accuracy, and a per-class precision fusion rule adds about 0.4% accuracy over either alone on ImageNet.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.