Similar articles

Abstract: Many active learning methods assume that a learner can simply ask for the full annotations of some training data from annotators. These methods mainly try to cut the annotation costs by minimizing the number of annotation actions. Unfortunately, annotating instances exactly in many real-world classification tasks is still expensive. To reduce the cost of a single annotation action, we try to tackle a novel active learning setting, named active learning with complementary labels (ALCL). ALCL learners ask only yes/no questions in some classes. After receiving answers from annotators, ALCL learners obtain a few supervised instances and more training instances with complementary labels, which specify only one of the classes to which the pattern does not belong. There are two challenging issues in ALCL: one is how to sample instances to be queried, and the other is how to learn from these complementary labels and ordinary accurate labels. For the first issue, we propose an uncertainty-based sampling strategy under this novel setup. For the second issue, we upgrade a previous ALCL method to fit our sampling strategy. Experimental results on various datasets demonstrate the superiority of our approaches.

基于主动学习的不确定性感知补标签查询

[1]Arnab A, Sun C, Nagrani A, et al., 2020. Uncertainty-aware weakly supervised action detection from untrimmed videos. Proc 16^th European Conf on Computer Vision, p.751-768.

[2]Blundell C, Cornebise J, Kavukcuoglu K, et al., 2015. Weight uncertainty in neural network. Proc 32^nd Int Conf on Machine Learning, p.1613-1622.

[3]Cipolla R, Gal Y, Kendall A, 2018. Multi-task learning using uncertainty to weigh losses for scene geometry and semantics. IEEE/CVF Conf on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, p.7482-7491.

[4]Clanuwat T, Bober-Irizar M, Kitamoto A, et al., 2018. Deep learning for classical Japanese literature. https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.01718

[5]Culotta A, McCallum A, 2005. Reducing labeling effort for structured prediction tasks. Proc 20^th National Conf on Artificial Intelligence, p.746-751.

[6]Feng L, Kaneko T, Han B, et al., 2020. Learning with multiple complementary labels. Proc 37^th Int Conf on Machine Learning, p.3072-3081.

[7]Gal Y, Ghahramani Z, 2016. Dropout as a Bayesian approximation: representing model uncertainty in deep learning. Proc 33^rd Int Conf on Machine Learning, p.1050-1059.

[8]Geng Y, Han ZB, Zhang CQ, et al., 2021. Uncertainty-aware multi-view representation learning. Proc 35^th AAAI Conf on Artificial Intelligence, p.7545-7553.

[9]Gonsior J, Thiele M, Lehner W, 2020. WEAKAL: combining active learning and weak supervision. Proc 23^rd Int Conf on Discovery Science, p.34-49.

[10]He KM, Zhang XY, Ren SQ, et al., 2016. Deep residual learning for image recognition. IEEE Conf on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, p.770-778.

[11]Hu PY, Lipton ZC, Anandkumar A, et al., 2019. Active learning with partial feedback. https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07427v2

[12]Ishida T, Niu G, Hu WH, et al., 2017. Learning from complementary labels. Proc 31^st Conf on Neural Information Processing Systems, p.5639-5649.

[13]Ishida T, Niu G, Menon A, et al., 2019. Complementary-label learning for arbitrary losses and models. Proc 36^th Int Conf on Machine Learning, p.2971-2980.

[14]Kingma DP, Ba J, 2015. Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. Proc 3^rd Int Conf on Learning Representations, p.14-17.

[15]Krizhevsky A, Hinton G, 2009. Learning Multiple Layers of Features from Tiny Images. MS Thesis, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

[16]LeCun Y, Bottou L, Bengio Y, et al., 1998. Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition. Proc IEEE, 86(11):2278-2324.

[17]Liu SY, Hu TL, Chen K, et al., 2023. Complementary label queries for efficient active learning. Proc 6^th Int Conf on Image and Graphics Processing, p.1-7.

[18]Ren PZ, Xiao Y, Chang XJ, et al., 2021. A survey of deep active learning. ACM Comput Surv, 54(9):180.

[19]Scheffer T, Decomain C, Wrobel S, 2001. Active hidden Markov models for information extraction. Proc 4^th Int Conf on Intelligent Data Analysis, p.309-318.

[20]Settles B, 2009. Active Learning Literature Survey. Technical Report No. 1648, University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA.

[21]Settles B, 2011. From theories to queries: active learning in practice. Active Learning and Experimental Design Workshop in Conjunction with AISTATS, Article 18.

[22]Settles B, Craven M, 2008. An analysis of active learning strategies for sequence labeling tasks. Conf on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, p.1070-1079.

[23]Sinha S, Ebrahimi S, Darrell T, 2019. Variational adversarial active learning. IEEE/CVF Int Conf on Computer Vision, p.5971-5980.

[24]Wang HB, Liu WW, Zhao Y, et al., 2019. Discriminative and correlative partial multi-label learning. Proc 28^th Int Joint Conf on Artificial Intelligence, p.3691-3697.

[25]Xiao H, Rasul K, Vollgraf R, 2017. Fashion-MNIST: a novel image dataset for benchmarking machine learning algorithms. https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.07747

[26]Yoo D, Kweon IS, 2019. Learning loss for active learning. IEEE/CVF Conf on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, p.93-102.

[27]Younesian T, Epema D, Chen LY, 2020. Active learning for noisy data streams using weak and strong labelers. https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.14149

[28]Zhang CC, Chaudhuri K, 2015. Active learning from weak and strong labelers. Proc 28^th Int Conf on Neural Information Processing Systems, p.703-711.

[29]Zhang T, Zhou ZH, 2018. Semi-supervised optimal margin distribution machines. Proc 27^th Int Joint Conf on Artificial Intelligence, p.3104-3110.

[30]Zhang ZZ, Lan CL, Zeng WJ, et al., 2020. Uncertainty-aware few-shot image classification. Proc 30^th Int Joint Conf on Artificial Intelligence, p.3420-3426.

[31]Zhou ZH, 2018. A brief introduction to weakly supervised learning. Nat Sci Rev, 5(1):44-53.