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

Pushing the limits of self-supervised ResNets: Can we outperform supervised learning without labels on ImageNet?

About

Despite recent progress made by self-supervised methods in representation learning with residual networks, they still underperform supervised learning on the ImageNet classification benchmark, limiting their applicability in performance-critical settings. Building on prior theoretical insights from ReLIC [Mitrovic et al., 2021], we include additional inductive biases into self-supervised learning. We propose a new self-supervised representation learning method, ReLICv2, which combines an explicit invariance loss with a contrastive objective over a varied set of appropriately constructed data views to avoid learning spurious correlations and obtain more informative representations. ReLICv2 achieves $77.1\%$ top-$1$ accuracy on ImageNet under linear evaluation on a ResNet50, thus improving the previous state-of-the-art by absolute $+1.5\%$; on larger ResNet models, ReLICv2 achieves up to $80.6\%$ outperforming previous self-supervised approaches with margins up to $+2.3\%$. Most notably, ReLICv2 is the first unsupervised representation learning method to consistently outperform the supervised baseline in a like-for-like comparison over a range of ResNet architectures. Using ReLICv2, we also learn more robust and transferable representations that generalize better out-of-distribution than previous work, both on image classification and semantic segmentation. Finally, we show that despite using ResNet encoders, ReLICv2 is comparable to state-of-the-art self-supervised vision transformers.

Nenad Tomasev, Ioana Bica, Brian McWilliams, Lars Buesing, Razvan Pascanu, Charles Blundell, Jovana Mitrovic• 2022

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Semantic segmentationPASCAL VOC 2012 (val)
Mean IoU77.9
2040
Image ClassificationImageNet 1k (test)--
798
Image ClassificationCIFAR100 (test)
Top-1 Accuracy85.3
377
Image ClassificationStanford Cars (test)
Accuracy92.3
306
Image ClassificationCIFAR10 (test)
Test Accuracy97.7
284
ClassificationCIFAR10 (test)
Accuracy90.2
266
Image ClassificationImageNet (test)
Top-1 Acc80.6
235
Image ClassificationFGVC-Aircraft (test)
Accuracy88.7
231
Image ClassificationImageNet-Sketch (test)
Top-1 Acc0.099
132
Image ClassificationOxford Flowers-102 (test)
Top-1 Accuracy95.7
131
Showing 10 of 34 rows

Other info

Code

Follow for update