2018

Do CIFAR-10 Classifiers Generalize to CIFAR-10?

Vaishaal Shankar

citations

Cite Score

24

AI summary

This paper introduces a new CIFAR-10 dataset to measure the generalization capability of image classification models, and finds a significant drop in accuracy (4%-10%) for a broad range of deep learning models, indicating that current accuracy numbers are brittle and susceptible to even minute natural variations in the data distribution.

Main Contributions

  • Introduces a new test set for CIFAR-10 that contains truly unseen images.
  • Evaluates the performance of 30 image classification models on the new test set, and shows a significant drop in accuracy (4% to 10%).
  • Shows that current accuracy numbers are brittle and susceptible to even minute natural variations in the data distribution.
  • Shows that the best performing models on the new test set see an increased advantage over more established baselines.
  • Indicates that current CIFAR-10 classifiers have difficulty generalizing to natural variations in image data.

Abstract

Machine learning is currently dominated by largely experimental work focused on improvements in a few key tasks. However, the impressive accuracy numbers of the best performing models are questionable because the same test sets have been used to select these models for multiple years now. To understand the danger of overfitting, we measure the accuracy of CIFAR-10 classifiers by creating a new test set of truly unseen images. Although we ensure that the new test set is as close to the original data distribution as possible, we find a large drop in accuracy (4% to 10%) for a broad range of deep learning models. Yet, more recent models with higher original accuracy show a smaller drop and better overall performance, indicating that this drop is likely not due to overfitting based on adaptivity. Instead, we view our results as evidence that current accuracy numbers are brittle and susceptible to even minute natural variations in the data distribution.

Citation Graph

Loading graph...

References [22]

Sort:
Filter:

K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, Jian Sun - 2016

20 papers in library cite

K. Simonyan, Andrew Zisserman - 2014

20 papers in library cite

Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, Geoffrey E. Hinton - 2012

71 papers in library cite

G. Huang, Ze Liu, K. Weinberger, Laurens Van Der Maaten - 2017

5 papers in library cite

Alex Krizhevsky - 2009

27 papers in library cite

G. Miller - 1995

5 papers in library cite

K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, Jian Sun - 2016

4 papers in library cite

Geoffrey E. Hinton, N. Srivastava, Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, Ruslan R. Salakhutdinov - 2012

25 papers in library cite

Antonio Torralba, Rob Fergus, W. Freeman - 2008

8 papers in library cite

Saining Xie, Ross Girshick, Piotr Dollar, Zhuowen Tu, K. He - 2017

3 papers in library cite

S. Zagoruyko, N. Komodakis - 2016

5 papers in library cite

Barret Zoph, V. Vasudevan, J. Shlens, Quoc Le - 2017

2 papers in library cite

T. Devries, G. Taylor - 2017

1 paper in library cites

X. Gastaldi - 2017

2 papers in library cite

A. Blum, Moritz Hardt - 2015

2 papers in library cite

A. Coates, A. Ng, Honglak Lee - 2011

7 papers in library cite

D. Han, Jeremy Kim, Jeremy Kim - 2017

3 papers in library cite

Y. H. Q. V. Le, E. Real, A. Aggarwal - 2018

3 papers in library cite

A. Rahimi, Benjamin Recht - 2009

2 papers in library cite

K. Kawaguchi, L. Kaelbling, Yoshua Bengio - 2017

1 paper in library cites

Y. Yamada, M. Iwamura, K. Kise - 2018

1 paper in library cites

Shuming Liu, W. Deng - 2015

1 paper in library cites

Cited by

2

papers in your library

Cites

15

papers in your library

Read

on November 10, 2025

Your review

Tags

Paper Aliases

No aliases