REVIEW 2 cited by
UnLearning from Experience to Avoid Spurious Correlations
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
While deep neural networks can achieve state-of-the-art performance in many tasks, these models are more fragile than they appear. They are prone to learning spurious correlations in their training data, leading to surprising failure cases. In this paper, we propose a new approach that addresses the issue of spurious correlations: UnLearning from Experience (ULE). Our method is based on using two classification models trained in parallel: student and teacher models. Both models receive the same batches of training data. The student model is trained with no constraints and pursues the spurious correlations in the data. The teacher model is trained to solve the same classification problem while avoiding the mistakes of the student model. As training is done in parallel, the better the student model learns the spurious correlations, the more robust the teacher model becomes. The teacher model uses the gradient of the student's output with respect to its input to unlearn mistakes made by the student. We show that our method is effective on the Waterbirds, CelebA, Spawrious and UrbanCars datasets.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Association Restoration Test: Revealing Restorable Shortcuts after Unlearning
ART shows that many shortcut-mitigation and association-unlearning methods leave label-attribute associations that can be reactivated by amplifying residual feature directions under the original classifier head.
-
Diverse Prototypical Ensembles Improve Robustness to Subpopulation Shift
A prototype-based ensemble head with explicit diversity regularization improves worst-group accuracy on nine subpopulation shift benchmarks, often matching or beating prior state of the art.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.