Multi-label complementary label learning (MLCLL) is a weakly supervised paradigm that addresses multi-label learning (MLL) tasks using complementary labels (i.e., irrelevant labels) instead of relevant labels. Existing methods typically adopt an unbiased risk estimator (URE) under the assumption that complementary labels follow a uniform distribution. However, this assumption fails in realworld scenarios due to instance-specific annotation biases, making URE-based methods ineffective under such conditions.

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

Experiments on twelve corrupted MLL datasets show the effectiveness of SMILEoverseveral existing SPMLL approaches.

Multilabel classification is a challenging problem arising in applications ranging from information retrieval to image tagging. A popular approach to this problem is to employ a reduction to a suitable series of binary or multiclass problems (e.g., computing a softmax based cross-entropy over the relevant labels). While such methods have seen empirical success, less is understood about how well they approximate two fundamental performance measures: precision@$k$ and recall@$k$. In this paper, we study five commonly used reductions, including the one-versus-all reduction, a reduction to multiclass classification, and normalised versions of the same, wherein the contribution of each instance is normalised by the number of relevant labels. Our main result is a formal justification of each reduction: we explicate their underlying risks, and show they are each consistent with respect to either precision or recall. Further, we show that in general no reduction can be optimal for both measures. We empirically validate our results, demonstrating scenarios where normalised reductions yield recall gains over unnormalised counterparts.

Abstract--Multi-label learning often requires identifying all relevant labels for training instances, but collecting full label annotations is costly and labor-intensive. In many datasets, only a single positive label is annotated per training instance, despite the presence of multiple relevant labels. This setting, known as single-positive multi-label learning (SPMLL), presents a significant challenge due to its extreme form of partial supervision. We propose a model-agnostic approach to SPMLL that draws on conformal prediction to produce calibrated set-valued outputs, enabling reliable multi-label predictions at test time. We evaluate our approach on 12 benchmark datasets, demonstrating consistent improvements over existing baselines and practical applicability.

It is obvious that Eq. (5) holds for k = 2 . The information of the datasets we used is shown in Table 1. The first four rows in Table 1 are the existing label distribution datasets; the last three rows in Table 1 are the datasets we created. Since some examples in the original label distribution datasets do not satisfy the prerequisites of our paper (i.e., there are some examples

Multilabel classification is a challenging problem arising in applications ranging from information retrieval to image tagging. A popular approach to this problem is to employ a reduction to a suitable series of binary or multiclass problems (e.g., computing a softmax based cross-entropy over the relevant labels). While such methods have seen empirical success, less is understood about how well they approximate two fundamental performance measures: precision@ k and recall@ k . In this paper, we study five commonly used reductions, including the one-versus-all reduction, a reduction to multiclass classification, and normalised versions of the same, wherein the contribution of each instance is normalised by the number of relevant labels. Our main result is a formal justification of each reduction: we explicate their underlying risks, and show they are each consistent with respect to either precision or recall.

Multilabel classification is a challenging problem arising in applications ranging from information retrieval to image tagging. A popular approach to this problem is to employ a reduction to a suitable series of binary or multiclass problems (e.g., computing a softmax based cross-entropy over the relevant labels). While such methods have seen empirical success, less is understood about how well they approximate two fundamental performance measures: precision@ k and recall@ k . In this paper, we study five commonly used reductions, including the one-versus-all reduction, a reduction to multiclass classification, and normalised versions of the same, wherein the contribution of each instance is normalised by the number of relevant labels. Our main result is a formal justification of each reduction: we explicate their underlying risks, and show they are each consistent with respect to either precision or recall.

Multi-label ranking, which returns multiple top-ranked labels for each instance, has a wide range of applications for visual tasks. Due to its complicated setting, prior arts have proposed various measures to evaluate model performances. However, both theoretical analysis and empirical observations show that a model might perform inconsistently on different measures. To bridge this gap, this paper proposes a novel measure named Top-K Pairwise Ranking (TKPR), and a series of analyses show that TKPR is compatible with existing ranking-based measures. In light of this, we further establish an empirical surrogate risk minimization framework for TKPR. On one hand, the proposed framework enjoys convex surrogate losses with the theoretical support of Fisher consistency. On the other hand, we establish a sharp generalization bound for the proposed framework based on a novel technique named data-dependent contraction. Finally, empirical results on benchmark datasets validate the effectiveness of the proposed framework.