REVIEW 1 cited by
Learning Transferable Negative Prompts for Out-of-Distribution Detection
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
Learning Transferable Negative Prompts for Out-of-Distribution Detection
read the original abstract
Existing prompt learning methods have shown certain capabilities in Out-of-Distribution (OOD) detection, but the lack of OOD images in the target dataset in their training can lead to mismatches between OOD images and In-Distribution (ID) categories, resulting in a high false positive rate. To address this issue, we introduce a novel OOD detection method, named 'NegPrompt', to learn a set of negative prompts, each representing a negative connotation of a given class label, for delineating the boundaries between ID and OOD images. It learns such negative prompts with ID data only, without any reliance on external outlier data. Further, current methods assume the availability of samples of all ID classes, rendering them ineffective in open-vocabulary learning scenarios where the inference stage can contain novel ID classes not present during training. In contrast, our learned negative prompts are transferable to novel class labels. Experiments on various ImageNet benchmarks show that NegPrompt surpasses state-of-the-art prompt-learning-based OOD detection methods and maintains a consistent lead in hard OOD detection in closed- and open-vocabulary classification scenarios. Code is available at https://github.com/mala-lab/negprompt.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Representation Trajectories Matters: Complementary Evidence for OOD Detection and Image Classification
Recording how an image's representation evolves block-by-block, relative to learned class routes, improves OOD detection in 131/152 comparisons and clean classification in 71/72 model–dataset cases.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.