Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
119 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

To Smooth or Not? When Label Smoothing Meets Noisy Labels (2106.04149v6)

Published 8 Jun 2021 in cs.LG

Abstract: Label smoothing (LS) is an arising learning paradigm that uses the positively weighted average of both the hard training labels and uniformly distributed soft labels. It was shown that LS serves as a regularizer for training data with hard labels and therefore improves the generalization of the model. Later it was reported LS even helps with improving robustness when learning with noisy labels. However, we observed that the advantage of LS vanishes when we operate in a high label noise regime. Intuitively speaking, this is due to the increased entropy of $\mathbb{P}(\text{noisy label}|X)$ when the noise rate is high, in which case, further applying LS tends to "over-smooth" the estimated posterior. We proceeded to discover that several learning-with-noisy-labels solutions in the literature instead relate more closely to negative/not label smoothing (NLS), which acts counter to LS and defines as using a negative weight to combine the hard and soft labels! We provide understandings for the properties of LS and NLS when learning with noisy labels. Among other established properties, we theoretically show NLS is considered more beneficial when the label noise rates are high. We provide extensive experimental results on multiple benchmarks to support our findings too. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/UCSC-REAL/negative-label-smoothing.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (6)
  1. Jiaheng Wei (30 papers)
  2. Hangyu Liu (11 papers)
  3. Tongliang Liu (251 papers)
  4. Gang Niu (125 papers)
  5. Masashi Sugiyama (286 papers)
  6. Yang Liu (2253 papers)
Citations (59)

Summary

Analyzing the Impact of Label Smoothing on Various Label Noise Regimes

The paper "To Smooth or Not? When Label Smoothing Meets Noisy Labels" provides a rigorous analysis of the interplay between label smoothing (LS) techniques and noisy label conditions within the field of machine learning. The paper addresses the consequential effects of LS on model performance, particularly under varying regimes of label noise, and explores alternatives that better optimize under high-noise scenarios.

Core Concepts and Insights

Label Smoothing (LS) is a regularization method that modifies "hard" labels by integrating a weighted average of the original labels with a uniform distribution over classes, intending to prevent overfitting and enhance generalization. The paper identifies that LS has shown potential in improving robustness against moderately noisy labels. However, it also emphasizes that LS may lead to "oversmoothing" — a condition where the model's certainty in its predictions is diminished excessively, leading to degraded performance in severe noise settings.

Interestingly, the authors introduce a counterpoint to LS through what they describe as Negative Label Smoothing (NLS). Instead of a positive weight, NLS uses a negative weight to modulate label distributions, which may sometimes act beneficially when label noise rates escalate. This discovery underscores the possibility that in high noise frameworks, adopting NLS could mitigate the detrimental effects of excessive smoothing, allowing for a restoration of model confidence and accuracy.

Theoretical and Empirical Analysis

The paper makes several key contributions through theoretical derivations and empirical validations:

  1. Phase Transition in Optimal Smoothing Rate: A primary theoretical contribution is the identification of a phase transition point that determines when LS is more beneficial versus when NLS becomes advantageous as label noise increases. The findings suggest that NLS is preferable once noise levels surpass a certain threshold.
  2. Generalized Risk Minimization: Through the formulation of a risk-minimization framework, the paper illustrates how the choice between LS and NLS affects the optimization landscape of the learning model. This analysis is mathematically underpinned by the derivation of additional bias terms that come into play when switching from LS to NLS.
  3. Empirical Validation: Extensive experiments are conducted on multiple benchmark datasets including CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and UCI data with controlled noise levels, alongside real-world noisy datasets, to illustrate the model's performance shifts due to the spectrum of smoothing rates. These experiments confirm that NLS indeed serves a beneficial role in high-noise conditions, aligning with the theoretical predictions.
  4. Connections to Existing Approaches: On a practical note, the paper connects its findings with existing label-noise robust methodologies such as loss corrections and complementary label learning, suggesting alignments in theoretical foundations and potential integrative applications.

Implications and Future Directions

The implications of this research extend both theoretically and practically within machine learning. On a theoretical front, the work has added nuance to the understanding of role-specific regularizations in learning under noise. Practically, it presents a compelling case for reframing strategies involving LS in models designed to operate with imperfect data.

Future research directions might involve integrating NLS with other state-of-the-art noise-robust mechanisms, further exploring its broader applicability in complex domains, and quantifying the trade-offs between model confidence, bias, and variance in varied learning conditions.

This paper enriches the toolkit available for handling noisy labels in machine learning, offering alternative perspectives that could prove critical for maintaining high model performance across diverse scenarios.