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

M3D: Dataset Condensation by Minimizing Maximum Mean Discrepancy

About

Training state-of-the-art (SOTA) deep models often requires extensive data, resulting in substantial training and storage costs. To address these challenges, dataset condensation has been developed to learn a small synthetic set that preserves essential information from the original large-scale dataset. Nowadays, optimization-oriented methods have been the primary method in the field of dataset condensation for achieving SOTA results. However, the bi-level optimization process hinders the practical application of such methods to realistic and larger datasets. To enhance condensation efficiency, previous works proposed Distribution-Matching (DM) as an alternative, which significantly reduces the condensation cost. Nonetheless, current DM-based methods still yield less comparable results to SOTA optimization-oriented methods. In this paper, we argue that existing DM-based methods overlook the higher-order alignment of the distributions, which may lead to sub-optimal matching results. Inspired by this, we present a novel DM-based method named M3D for dataset condensation by Minimizing the Maximum Mean Discrepancy between feature representations of the synthetic and real images. By embedding their distributions in a reproducing kernel Hilbert space, we align all orders of moments of the distributions of real and synthetic images, resulting in a more generalized condensed set. Notably, our method even surpasses the SOTA optimization-oriented method IDC on the high-resolution ImageNet dataset. Extensive analysis is conducted to verify the effectiveness of the proposed method. Source codes are available at https://github.com/Hansong-Zhang/M3D.

Hansong Zhang, Shikun Li, Pengju Wang, Dan Zeng, Shiming Ge• 2023

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Image ClassificationCIFAR-100 (test)
Accuracy50.9
3518
Image ClassificationCIFAR-10 (test)
Accuracy69.9
3381
Image ClassificationMNIST (test)
Accuracy98.2
882
Image ClassificationCIFAR-100
Accuracy17.7
302
ClassificationCIFAR10 (test)
Accuracy69.9
266
ClassificationCIFAR-100 (test)
Accuracy50.9
129
Binary classification of normal versus abnormal EEG signalsTUAB
Balanced Accuracy80.1
16
Brain-Body Imaging RegressionMoBI
PCC0.5
16
Emotion RecognitionSEED V
Accuracy26.9
16
Six-class classification of EEG eventsTUEV
Balanced Accuracy45.8
16
Showing 10 of 10 rows

Other info

Follow for update