Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
29 lines (18 loc) · 1.97 KB

deep_active_learning_lidar.md

File metadata and controls

29 lines (18 loc) · 1.97 KB

December 2019

tl;dr: Use active learning to reduce the amount of labeled data.

Overall impression

In conventional deep learning, data are labeled in a random fashion, and they are fed into a training pipeline with random shuffling.

In active learning, a model iteratively evaluates the informativeness of unlabeled data, selects the most informative samples to be labeled by human annotators and updates the training sets.

The detection task is a simplified version of classification and size/depth regression inside frustum.

Active learning is better than random baseline, regardless of the uncertainty evaluation method.

Key ideas

  • Active learning also alleviates data imbalance problem as it actively queries images that are most informative rather than their natural frequency.
  • This paper focuses on the uncertainty of classification. It improves the data efficiency for cls by 60%, but only a minor increase in localization task. --> This could be improved by introducing localization uncertainty into active learning framework.
  • MC-dropout and deep ensemble (training multiple models with the same architecture but diff init.) is better than single softmax output --> the difference is quite small, so softmax is good enough in reality

Technical details

  • One way to evaluate quality of predictive uncertainty is sparsification plot. A well-estimated predictive uncertainty should correlate with the true error. And by gradually removing the predictions with high uncertainty, the average error over the rest of the predictions will decrease.
    • If correct, the sparsification plot should be monotonically decreasing.

Notes