open-set sample
- North America > United States > California > Santa Clara County > Palo Alto (0.04)
- North America > Canada > Ontario > Toronto (0.04)
- Europe > Italy (0.04)
- Asia > China (0.04)
OpenAUC: Towards AUC-Oriented Open-Set Recognition
Traditional machine learning follows a close-set assumption that the training and test set share the same label space. While in many practical scenarios, it is inevitable that some test samples belong to unknown classes (open-set). To fix this issue, Open-Set Recognition (OSR), whose goal is to make correct predictions on both close-set samples and open-set samples, has attracted rising attention. In this direction, the vast majority of literature focuses on the pattern of open-set samples. However, how to evaluate model performance in this challenging task is still unsolved. In this paper, a systematic analysis reveals that most existing metrics are essentially inconsistent with the aforementioned goal of OSR: (1) For metrics extended from close-set classification, such as Open-set F-score, Youden's index, and Normalized Accuracy, a poor open-set prediction can escape from a low performance score with a superior close-set prediction.
- North America > United States > California > Santa Clara County > Palo Alto (0.04)
- North America > Canada > Ontario > Toronto (0.04)
- Europe > Italy (0.04)
- Asia > China > Guangdong Province > Shenzhen (0.04)
- Information Technology > Data Science > Data Mining (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Performance Analysis > Accuracy (0.95)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning (0.93)
OpenAUC: Towards AUC-Oriented Open-Set Recognition
Traditional machine learning follows a close-set assumption that the training and test set share the same label space. While in many practical scenarios, it is inevitable that some test samples belong to unknown classes (open-set). To fix this issue, Open-Set Recognition (OSR), whose goal is to make correct predictions on both close-set samples and open-set samples, has attracted rising attention. In this direction, the vast majority of literature focuses on the pattern of open-set samples. However, how to evaluate model performance in this challenging task is still unsolved.
OpenAUC: Towards AUC-Oriented Open-Set Recognition
Wang, Zitai, Xu, Qianqian, Yang, Zhiyong, He, Yuan, Cao, Xiaochun, Huang, Qingming
Traditional machine learning follows a close-set assumption that the training and test set share the same label space. While in many practical scenarios, it is inevitable that some test samples belong to unknown classes (open-set). To fix this issue, Open-Set Recognition (OSR), whose goal is to make correct predictions on both close-set samples and open-set samples, has attracted rising attention. In this direction, the vast majority of literature focuses on the pattern of open-set samples. However, how to evaluate model performance in this challenging task is still unsolved. In this paper, a systematic analysis reveals that most existing metrics are essentially inconsistent with the aforementioned goal of OSR: (1) For metrics extended from close-set classification, such as Open-set F-score, Youden's index, and Normalized Accuracy, a poor open-set prediction can escape from a low performance score with a superior close-set prediction. (2) Novelty detection AUC, which measures the ranking performance between close-set and open-set samples, ignores the close-set performance. To fix these issues, we propose a novel metric named OpenAUC. Compared with existing metrics, OpenAUC enjoys a concise pairwise formulation that evaluates open-set performance and close-set performance in a coupling manner. Further analysis shows that OpenAUC is free from the aforementioned inconsistency properties. Finally, an end-to-end learning method is proposed to minimize the OpenAUC risk, and the experimental results on popular benchmark datasets speak to its effectiveness. Project Page: https://github.com/wang22ti/OpenAUC.
- North America > United States > California > Santa Clara County > Palo Alto (0.04)
- North America > Canada > Ontario > Toronto (0.04)
- Europe > Italy (0.04)
- Asia > China > Guangdong Province > Shenzhen (0.04)
Open-set Adversarial Defense
Shao, Rui, Perera, Pramuditha, Yuen, Pong C., Patel, Vishal M.
Open-set recognition and adversarial defense study two key aspects of deep learning that are vital for real-world deployment. The objective of open-set recognition is to identify samples from open-set classes during testing, while adversarial defense aims to defend the network against images with imperceptible adversarial perturbations. In this paper, we show that open-set recognition systems are vulnerable to adversarial attacks. Furthermore, we show that adversarial defense mechanisms trained on known classes do not generalize well to open-set samples. Motivated by this observation, we emphasize the need of an Open-Set Adversarial Defense (OSAD) mechanism. This paper proposes an Open-Set Defense Network (OSDN) as a solution to the OSAD problem. The proposed network uses an encoder with feature-denoising layers coupled with a classifier to learn a noise-free latent feature representation. Two techniques are employed to obtain an informative latent feature space with the objective of improving open-set performance. First, a decoder is used to ensure that clean images can be reconstructed from the obtained latent features. Then, self-supervision is used to ensure that the latent features are informative enough to carry out an auxiliary task. We introduce a testing protocol to evaluate OSAD performance and show the effectiveness of the proposed method in multiple object classification datasets. The implementation code of the proposed method is available at: https://github.com/rshaojimmy/ECCV2020-OSAD.
- North America > United States (0.14)
- Asia > China > Hong Kong (0.04)
- Government > Military (0.51)
- Information Technology > Security & Privacy (0.37)
- Information Technology > Sensing and Signal Processing > Image Processing (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Vision (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning (0.94)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks > Deep Learning (0.67)