arXiv:2501.12191cs.LGcs.CV2025-01

提出一种新损失函数HEM,显著提升模型在多种视觉任务中的泛化与鲁棒性。

HEM: a margin-based loss for visual categorisation tasks

  • 基于误差边界设计新损失函数HEM,优化网络训练动态
  • 在未知类别识别、持续学习和语义分割上优于交叉熵损失
  • 适合需要强泛化能力的场景,如对抗攻击防御与数据不平衡

在分类任务中,尽管已有多种损失函数可用于训练深度神经网络,但交叉熵(CE)损失仍是默认选择。本文提出一种基于误差边界的替代损失——高误差边界(HEM)损失,旨在改善神经网络的训练动态。我们在多种主流深度网络架构和基准数据集上对HEM进行了广泛评估,所有实验设置和超参数均沿用文献中为CE损失优化的标准配置。结果表明,HEM在图像分类相关任务中表现更优:包括未知类别拒绝、对抗鲁棒性、不平衡数据学习、持续学习以及像素级分类任务语义分割。仅在干净与损坏图像的平衡数据分类任务中,HEM略逊于CE,但差距微小。与针对特定任务设计的专用损失对比,如用于未知类别拒绝的LogitNorm,其在该任务上表现相当,但在持续学习和语义分割中明显落后;用于不平衡数据的Logit-adjusted损失虽在该任务上更优,却在未知类别拒绝和语义分割中表现较差;而流行的语义分割损失DICE在所有任务上均劣于HEM。总体而言,HEM在所测试任务中具有竞争力,尤其在拒绝分布外样本、持续学习及语义分割上大幅领先。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Training deep neural networks (DNNs) on classification tasks can be performed with a number of different losses, but cross-entropy (CE) loss is the de-facto standard. Here, we propose an alternative loss, high error margin (HEM), which is a margin based loss modified to improve the training dynamics of neural networks. HEM loss is evaluated extensively using a wide range of DNN architectures and benchmark datasets with all experimental settings and training hyper-parameters taken from the literature, and hence, optimised for CE loss. HEM is found to be more effective than CE loss across a range of image-based tasks: unknown class rejection, adversarial robustness, learning with imbalanced data, continual learning, and semantic segmentation (a pixel-wise classification task). HEM is inferior to CE only in terms of clean and corrupt image classification with balanced training data, and this difference is small. We also compare HEM to specialised losses that have previously been proposed to improve performance for specific vision tasks. LogitNorm, a loss achieving state-of-the-art performance on unknown class rejection, produces similar performance to HEM for this task, but is much poorer for continual learning and semantic segmentation. Logit-adjusted loss, designed for imbalanced data, has superior results to HEM for that task, but performs worse on unknown class rejection and semantic segmentation. DICE, a popular loss for semantic segmentation, is inferior to HEM loss on all tasks, including semantic segmentation. Overall, HEM is competitive with the best alternative loss for all the tasks we have used and performs better than all other tested losses in terms of rejecting out-of-distribution examples, for continual learning, and by a substantial margin for semantic segmentation.

损失函数分类任务语义分割鲁棒性

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。