Paper detail

Empirical Study of Easy and Hard Examples in CNN Training

Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) generalize well despite their massive size and capability of memorizing all examples. There is a hypothesis that DNNs start learning from simple patterns and the hypothesis is based on the existence of examples that are consistently well-classified at the early training stage (i.e., easy examples) and examples misclassified (i.e., hard examples). Easy examples are the evidence that DNNs start learning from specific patterns and there is a consistent learning process. It is important to know how DNNs learn patterns and obtain generalization ability, however, properties of easy and hard examples are not thoroughly investigated (e.g., contributions to generalization and visual appearances). In this work, we study the similarities of easy and hard examples respectively for different Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) architectures, assessing how those examples contribute to generalization. Our results show that easy examples are visually similar to each other and hard examples are visually diverse, and both examples are largely shared across different CNN architectures. Moreover, while hard examples tend to contribute more to generalization than easy examples, removing a large number of easy examples leads to poor generalization. By analyzing those results, we hypothesize that biases in a dataset and Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) are the reasons why CNNs have consistent easy and hard examples. Furthermore, we show that large scale classification datasets can be efficiently compressed by using easiness proposed in this work.

preprint2019arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.