arXiv:2502. 06434v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Dataset pruning (DP) and dataset distillation (DD) fundamentally differ in their outputs: DP selects original image subsets, while DD generates synthetic images.
arXiv:2606. 18209v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Dataset distillation (DD) has emerged as a prominent approach in data centric machine learning, aiming to synthesize compact training sets for efficient training by compressing the information in large datasets into a small number of synthetic samples.
arXiv:2603. 25144v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Dataset distillation (DD) compresses a large training set into a small synthetic set, reducing storage and training cost, and has shown strong results on general benchmarks.
arXiv:2607. 00927v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Diffusion Transformers (DiTs) have demonstrated impressive performance in image generation but suffer from substantial computational overhead and resource consumption.
arXiv:2602.05391v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Dataset distillation seeks to synthesize a compact surrogate dataset that enables performance comparable to training on the original dataset for do...
The paper compares five machine unlearning (MU) methods—NegGrad, Fine‑Tuning (FT), Random Labeling (RL), SalUn, and MUNBa—on noisy‑label correction across CIFAR‑10, CIFAR‑100, and Food‑101N. Results show that the best MU strategy depends on the noise type: FT works well for most closed‑set noise, RL and SalUn are robust and nearly match retraining accuracy under instance‑dependent noise, while MUNBa excels only under extreme symmetric noise. In open‑set noise, retraining on the cleaned data actually hurts performance, indicating that approximating retraining is not suitable in that regime, yet all MU methods still achieve near‑retraining accuracy on Food‑101N with much lower runtime.
arXiv:2606. 08574v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Data pruning (DP), as an oft-stated strategy to alleviate heavy training burdens, reduces the volume of training samples according to a well-defined pruning method while striving for near-lossless performance.
arXiv:2609.39222v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: High-compression tokenizers are essential for scaling latent image generative models. However, aggressive compression creates a fundamental tradeoff be...
This paper demonstrate that whether masking-based token pruning helps or hurts worst-group robustness can be predicted before deployment, without labels or fine-tuning. A systematic study of semantic...
arXiv:2511. 18050v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Diffusion transformers have recently delivered strong text-to-image generation around 1K resolution, but we show that extending them to native 4K across diverse aspect ratios exposes a tightly coupled failure mode spanning positional encoding, VAE compression, and optimization.
arXiv:2609.09863v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Choosing a deep learning architecture for label-free single-cell classification remains an open question, with microscopy benchmarks reporting conflict...
Learning-State-Aware Dynamic Generative Data Augmentation on Small-Scale Datasets proposes LSADA, a method that constructs a learning state for each sample based on its loss and loss‑decrease rate to determine a sample‑specific augmentation strength. LSADA also introduces a decoupled data augmentation and diffusion fusion strategy that applies strength‑controlled transformations to class‑relevant regions while generating diverse class‑irrelevant regions, progressively fusing them to enhance image diversity while preserving class semantics. Experiments on nine public datasets demonstrate that LSADA outperforms the current state‑of‑the‑art dynamic GDA method by an average of 4.5% on six natural image datasets and 2.5% on three medical image datasets.
arXiv:2606. 07086v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Deep neural networks (DNNs) excel in computer vision tasks given large annotated datasets.