Test environment running 7.6.6

Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Are labels always necessary for classifier accuracy evaluation?

dc.contributor.authorDeng, Weijianen
dc.contributor.authorZheng, Liangen
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-17T22:20:37Z
dc.date.available2025-03-17T22:20:37Z
dc.date.issued2021en
dc.description.abstractTo calculate the model accuracy on a computer vision task, e.g., object recognition, we usually require a test set composing of test samples and their ground truth labels. Whilst standard usage cases satisfy this requirement, many real-world scenarios involve unlabeled test data, rendering common model evaluation methods infeasible. We investigate this important and under-explored problem, Automatic model Evaluation (AutoEval). Specifically, given a labeled training set and a classifier, we aim to estimate the classification accuracy on unlabeled test datasets. We construct a meta-dataset: a dataset comprised of datasets generated from the original images via various transformations such as rotation, background substitution, foreground scaling, etc. As the classification accuracy of the model on each sample (dataset) is known from the original dataset labels, our task can be solved via regression. Using the feature statistics to represent the distribution of a sample dataset, we can train regression models (e.g., a regression neural network) to predict model performance. Using synthetic meta-dataset and real-world datasets in training and testing, respectively, we report a reasonable and promising prediction of the model accuracy. We also provide insights into the application scope, limitation, and potential future direction of AutoEval.en
dc.description.sponsorshipThis work was supported by the ARC Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DE200101283) and the ARC Discovery Project (DP210102801). We thank all anonymous reviewers and ACs for their constructive comments.en
dc.description.statustrueen
dc.format.extent10en
dc.identifier.isbn9781665445092en
dc.identifier.issn1063-6919en
dc.identifier.otherresearchoutputwizard:a383154xPUB29624en
dc.identifier.otherScopus:85123184226en
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace-test.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/733721127
dc.identifier.urlhttp://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85123184226&partnerID=8YFLogxKen
dc.language.isoEnglishen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesProceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognitionen
dc.rightsPublisher Copyright: © 2021 IEEEen
dc.titleAre labels always necessary for classifier accuracy evaluation?en
dc.typeConference contributionen
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage15073en
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage15064en
local.contributor.affiliationDeng, Weijian; AGRTP Stipend Scholar - CECS, The Australian National Universityen
local.contributor.affiliationZheng, Liang; School of Computing, ANU College of Systems and Society, The Australian National Universityen
local.identifier.doi10.1109/CVPR46437.2021.01482en
local.identifier.purea9ba00ad-a382-43b7-a3e4-894d5fd23faaen
local.type.statusPublisheden

Downloads