A Comparative Survey of Deep Active Learning
Authors: Xueying Zhan, Qingzhong Wang, Kuan-hao Huang, Haoyi Xiong, Dejing Dou, Antoni B. Chan
AI-generated Key Points
- Deep learning relies on extensive labeled data for good performance
- Active Learning (AL) reduces labeling costs by selecting a small proportion of samples from unlabeled data for labeling and training
- Deep Active Learning (DAL) maximizes model performance under limited labeling cost/budget
- No available performance evaluation of DAL methods under fair comparison settings
- Authors construct a DAL toolkit called DeepAL+ that re-implements 19 highly-cited DAL methods
- Comparative experiments using frequently used datasets and DAL algorithms conducted
- Factors such as batch size and number of epochs in the training process influence efficacy of DAL
- Paper provides comprehensive survey of deep active learning methods and evaluates their performance under fair comparison settings
- Construction of DeepAL+ toolkit enables researchers to easily access and utilize different DAL methods for their own experiments
- Exploration of influential factors enhances understanding in this area and assists researchers in optimizing their DAL approaches.
Abstract: While deep learning (DL) is data-hungry and usually relies on extensive labeled data to deliver good performance, Active Learning (AL) reduces labeling costs by selecting a small proportion of samples from unlabeled data for labeling and training. Therefore, Deep Active Learning (DAL) has risen as a feasible solution for maximizing model performance under a limited labeling cost/budget in recent years. Although abundant methods of DAL have been developed and various literature reviews conducted, the performance evaluation of DAL methods under fair comparison settings is not yet available. Our work intends to fill this gap. In this work, We construct a DAL toolkit, DeepAL+, by re-implementing 19 highly-cited DAL methods. We survey and categorize DAL-related works and construct comparative experiments across frequently used datasets and DAL algorithms. Additionally, we explore some factors (e.g., batch size, number of epochs in the training process) that influence the efficacy of DAL, which provides better references for researchers to design their DAL experiments or carry out DAL-related applications.
Tools for this paper
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
We compare the title and abstract with papers indexed in our database. For arXiv papers, we search within the same category; for DOI and other sources, we search across sources and subjects. You can rerun the search as our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.