Noisy Correspondence Learning with Meta Similarity Correction

Haocheng Han, Kaiyao Miao, Qinghua Zheng, Minnan Luo
4/1/2023

No official code found. Best implementation: hhc1997/MSCN (12 stars, MIT, last commit 2024-03-28).

Abstract

Despite the success of multimodal learning in crossmodal retrieval task, the remarkable progress relies on the correct correspondence among multimedia data. However, collecting such ideal data is expensive and time-consuming. In practice, most widely used datasets are harvested from the Internet and inevitably contain mismatched pairs. Training on such noisy correspondence datasets causes performance degradation because the cross-modal retrieval methods can wrongly enforce the mismatched data to be similar. To tackle this problem, we propose a Meta Similarity Correction Network (MSCN) to provide reliable similarity scores. We view a binary classification task as the meta-process that encourages the MSCN to learn discrimination from positive and negative meta-data. To further alleviate the influence of noise, we design an effective data purification strategy using meta-data as prior knowledge to remove the noisy samples. Extensive experiments are conducted to demonstrate the strengths of our method in both synthetic and real-world noises, including Flickr30K, MS-COCO, and Conceptual Captions. Our code is publicly available.11https://github.com/hhc1997/MSCN

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations(1)

hhc1997/MSCNCommunity100%
MIT
121PythonNov 7, 20222 years agoMIT

Cite this paper

@article{han2023noisy,
  title  = {Noisy Correspondence Learning with Meta Similarity Correction},
  author = {Haocheng Han and Kaiyao Miao and Qinghua Zheng and Minnan Luo},
  year   = {2023},
  eprint = {2304.06275},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.06275},
  journal = {CVPR 2023 2023}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2304.06275.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2304.06275)

Discussion