Our new X account is live! Follow @wizwand_team for updates
WorkDL logo mark

How Well Do Self-Supervised Models Transfer?

About

Self-supervised visual representation learning has seen huge progress recently, but no large scale evaluation has compared the many models now available. We evaluate the transfer performance of 13 top self-supervised models on 40 downstream tasks, including many-shot and few-shot recognition, object detection, and dense prediction. We compare their performance to a supervised baseline and show that on most tasks the best self-supervised models outperform supervision, confirming the recently observed trend in the literature. We find ImageNet Top-1 accuracy to be highly correlated with transfer to many-shot recognition, but increasingly less so for few-shot, object detection and dense prediction. No single self-supervised method dominates overall, suggesting that universal pre-training is still unsolved. Our analysis of features suggests that top self-supervised learners fail to preserve colour information as well as supervised alternatives, but tend to induce better classifier calibration, and less attentive overfitting than supervised learners.

Linus Ericsson, Henry Gouk, Timothy M. Hospedales• 2020

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Image ClassificationCIFAR-100
Top-1 Accuracy80.27
622
Image ClassificationDTD
Accuracy71.68
487
Image ClassificationCIFAR-10--
471
Image ClassificationImageNet
Top-1 Accuracy76.82
429
Image ClassificationAircraft
Accuracy86.87
302
Image ClassificationiNaturalist 2018
Top-1 Accuracy61.72
287
Image ClassificationOxford-IIIT Pets
Accuracy89.05
259
Image ClassificationCaltech-101
Accuracy91.87
198
Image ClassificationFGVC Aircraft
Top-1 Accuracy86.87
185
Image ClassificationFlowers
Top-1 Acc98.49
80
Showing 10 of 25 rows

Other info

Follow for update