The main result is presented in Theorem 2. According to the definition of the Fiedler vector, we have ( L + L)( f + f) = ( λ + λ)( f + f). We outline the proof below for interested readers. The main result is presented in Theorem 2. We first present Stewart's theorem in Lemma 1 to assist Actual times may differ depending on hardware and environment. We also show the number of model parameters required for each method in Table S3. Hyper-parameters were selected based on a coarse search on the validation set.

Contrastive learning methods can be applied to deep regression by enforcing label distance relationships in feature space. However, these methods are limited to labeled data only unlike for classification, where unlabeled data can be used for contrastive pretraining. In this work, we extend contrastive regression methods to allow unlabeled data to be used in a semi-supervised setting, thereby reducing the reliance on manual annotations. We observe that the feature similarity matrix between unlabeled samples still reflect inter-sample relationships, and that an accurate ordinal relationship can be recovered through spectral seriation algorithms if the level of error is within certain bounds. By using the recovered ordinal relationship for contrastive learning on unlabeled samples, we can allow more data to be used for feature representation learning, thereby achieve more robust results. The ordinal rankings can also be used to supervise predictions on unlabeled samples, which can serve as an additional training signal. We provide theoretical guarantees and empirical support through experiments on different datasets, demonstrating that our method can surpass existing state-of-the-art semi-supervised deep regression methods. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first to explore using unlabeled data to perform contrastive learning for regression.

Abstract--Contrastive learning methods enforce label distance relationships in feature space to improve representation capability for regression models. However, these methods highly depend on label information to correctly recover ordinal relationships of features, limiting their applications to semi-supervised regression. In this work, we extend contrastive regression methods to allow unlabeled data to be used in the semi-supervised setting, thereby reducing the dependence on costly annotations. Particularly we construct the feature similarity matrix with both labeled and unlabeled samples in a mini-batch to reflect inter-sample relationships, and an accurate ordinal ranking of involved unlabeled samples can be recovered through spectral seriation algorithms if the level of error is within certain bounds. The introduction of labeled samples above provides regularization of the ordinal ranking with guidance from the ground-truth label information, making the ranking more reliable. T o reduce feature perturbations, we further utilize the dynamic programming algorithm to select robust features for the matrix construction. The recovered ordinal relationship is then used for contrastive learning on unlabeled samples, and we thus allow more data to be used for feature representation learning, thereby achieving more robust results. The ordinal rankings can also be used to supervise predictions on unlabeled samples, serving as an additional training signal. We provide theoretical guarantees and empirical verification through experiments on various datasets, demonstrating that our method can surpass existing state-of-the-art semi-supervised deep regression methods. Our code have been released on https://github.com/xmed-lab/CLSS.

However, these methods are limited to labeled data only unlike for classification, where unlabeled data can be used for contrastive pretraining.

Contrastive learning methods can be applied to deep regression by enforcing label distance relationships in feature space. However, these methods are limited to labeled data only unlike for classification, where unlabeled data can be used for contrastive pretraining. In this work, we extend contrastive regression methods to allow unlabeled data to be used in a semi-supervised setting, thereby reducing the reliance on manual annotations. We observe that the feature similarity matrix between unlabeled samples still reflect inter-sample relationships, and that an accurate ordinal relationship can be recovered through spectral seriation algorithms if the level of error is within certain bounds. By using the recovered ordinal relationship for contrastive learning on unlabeled samples, we can allow more data to be used for feature representation learning, thereby achieve more robust results.

Despite the power of deep neural networks for a wide range of tasks, an overconfident prediction issue has limited their practical use in many safety-critical applications. Many recent works have been proposed to mitigate this issue, but most of them require either additional computational costs in training and/or inference phases or customized architectures to output confidence estimates separately. In this paper, we propose a method of training deep neural networks with a novel loss function, named Correctness Ranking Loss, which regularizes class probabilities explicitly to be better confidence estimates in terms of ordinal ranking according to confidence. The proposed method is easy to implement and can be applied to the existing architectures without any modification. Also, it has almost the same computational costs for training as conventional deep classifiers and outputs reliable predictions by a single inference. Extensive experimental results on classification benchmark datasets indicate that the proposed method helps networks to produce well-ranked confidence estimates. We also demonstrate that it is effective for the tasks closely related to confidence estimation, out-of-distribution detection and active learning.

Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS) is a top-tier annual conference in machine learning. The 2016 edition of the conference comprised more than 2,400 paper submissions, 3,000 reviewers, and 8,000 attendees, representing a growth of nearly 40% in terms of submissions, 96% in terms of reviewers, and over 100% in terms of attendees as compared to the previous year. In this report, we analyze several aspects of the data collected during the review process, including an experiment investigating the efficacy of collecting ordinal rankings from reviewers (vs. usual scores aka cardinal rankings). Our goal is to check the soundness of the review process we implemented and, in going so, provide insights that may be useful in the design of the review process of subsequent conferences. We introduce a number of metrics that could be used for monitoring improvements when new ideas are introduced.