2020
DOI: 10.1109/tpami.2019.2913857
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Learning More Universal Representations for Transfer-Learning

Abstract: A representation is supposed universal if it encodes any element of the visual world (e.g., objects, scenes) in any configuration (e.g., scale, context). While not expecting pure universal representations, the goal in the literature is to improve the universality level, starting from a representation with a certain level. To do so, the state-of-the-art consists in learning CNN-based representations on a diversified training problem (e.g., ImageNet modified by adding annotated data). While it effectively increa… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
39
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
1
39
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The best outcomes among var-ious combinations of our single-layer depth augmented AlexNet and VGG-16 evaluated by our layer-wise fine-tuning scheme are shown. For other approaches, the performance gap between our implementation and that reported by [5], [25], [26], [27], [15], [28] is due to different target sets, train-test splits, network architectures, and iterations. Note that we have used similar hyper-parameters, iterations, and train-test splits for all approaches in Tables 3 and 4 to maintain a fair comparison.…”
Section: Comparison With Contemporary Transfer Learning Workmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…The best outcomes among var-ious combinations of our single-layer depth augmented AlexNet and VGG-16 evaluated by our layer-wise fine-tuning scheme are shown. For other approaches, the performance gap between our implementation and that reported by [5], [25], [26], [27], [15], [28] is due to different target sets, train-test splits, network architectures, and iterations. Note that we have used similar hyper-parameters, iterations, and train-test splits for all approaches in Tables 3 and 4 to maintain a fair comparison.…”
Section: Comparison With Contemporary Transfer Learning Workmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…iCaRL halves this score while our best configurations with DF E DF E DF E based on 100 and 1000 classes lose only 22 and 12 points respectively. The gap could probably be further reduced if the feature extractors were more universal [10,11]. This could, for instance, be achieved if DeeSIL's initial training would be done with an even larger number of classes.…”
Section: Evaluation and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One thousand classes are selected to form a diversified subset of ImageNet and thus increase universality (i.e. optimize their transferability toward new tasks) [10,11]. -F L1000 -train with a more challenging dataset which is obtained from weakly annotated Flickr group data and is visually more distant from the test set.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Existing unsupervised methods also do not use feature projection. Some other works have also been done for semi-supervised representation learning (Kevin Clark, 2018) and transfer learning (Tamaazousti et al, 2018). Jason Phang ( 2019) also proposed to use some data-rich intermediate supervised tasks for pre-training to help produce better representation for the end task.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%