Curriculum learning is a technique to improve a model performance and generalization based on the idea that easy samples should be presented before difficult ones during training. While it is generally complex to estimate a priori the difficulty of a given sample, recent works have shown that curriculum learning can be formulated dynamically in a self-supervised manner. The key idea is to somehow estimate the importance (or weight) of each sample directly during training based on the observation that easy and hard samples behave differently and can therefore be separated. However, these approaches are usually limited to a specific task (e.g., classification) and require extra data annotations, layers or parameters as well as a dedicated training procedure. We propose instead a simple and generic method that can be applied to a variety of losses and tasks without any change in the learning procedure. It consists in appending a novel loss function on top of any existing task loss, hence its name: the SuperLoss. Its main effect is to automatically downweight the contribution of samples with a large loss, i.e. hard samples, effectively mimicking the core principle of curriculum learning. As a side effect, we show that our loss prevents the memorization of noisy samples, making it possible to train from noisy data even with non-robust loss functions. Experimental results on image classification, regression, object detection and image retrieval demonstrate consistent gain, particularly in the presence of noise.

Additional Feedback: Further comments: - The definition of hard and easy examples is limited to their respective confidence scores or losses. Although previous work has similar definitions, confidence or loss are not always good indicators of true easiness or hardness of samples, e.g. they could be erroneous at early iterations. The paper lacks an experiment that illustrates the validity of the above definition. These are probably hard or noisy examples that were mistreated as easy examples by the model? These are probably a mixture of easy, hard, and noisy examples with low confidence across the loss spectrum that were mistreated as hard examples by the model.

Curriculum learning is a technique to improve a model performance and generalization based on the idea that easy samples should be presented before difficult ones during training. While it is generally complex to estimate a priori the difficulty of a given sample, recent works have shown that curriculum learning can be formulated dynamically in a self-supervised manner. The key idea is to somehow estimate the importance (or weight) of each sample directly during training based on the observation that easy and hard samples behave differently and can therefore be separated. However, these approaches are usually limited to a specific task (e.g., classification) and require extra data annotations, layers or parameters as well as a dedicated training procedure. We propose instead a simple and generic method that can be applied to a variety of losses and tasks without any change in the learning procedure.

Structural modularity is a pervasive feature of biological neural networks, which have been linked to several functional and computational advantages. Yet, the use of modular architectures in artificial neural networks has been relatively limited despite early successes. Here, we explore the performance and functional dynamics of a modular network trained on a memory task via an iterative growth curriculum. We find that for a given classical, non-modular recurrent neural network (RNN), an equivalent modular network will perform better across multiple metrics, including training time, generalizability, and robustness to some perturbations. We further examine how different aspects of a modular network's connectivity contribute to its computational capability. We then demonstrate that the inductive bias introduced by the modular topology is strong enough for the network to perform well even when the connectivity within modules is fixed and only the connections between modules are trained. Our findings suggest that gradual modular growth of RNNs could provide advantages for learning increasingly complex tasks on evolutionary timescales, and help build more scalable and compressible artificial networks.