arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 1812.07697cs.CVcs.LGq-bio.NC
收藏

在测试集上训练?Spampinato等人的分析[31]

Training on the test set? An analysis of Spampinato et al. [31]

Purdue University(普渡大学)

Ren Li, Jared S. Johansen, Hamad Ahmed, Thomas V. Ilyevsky, Ronnie B Wilbur, Hari M Bharadwaj, Jeffrey Mark Siskind

摘要:

最近的一篇论文[31]声称对使用EEG测量的受试者观看ImageNet刺激时诱发的大脑处理进行分类,并使用从该处理中导出的表示来创建一个新的对象分类器。这篇论文,以及随后的一系列论文[8,15,17,20,21,30,35],声称通过在几个计算机视觉任务上取得非常成功的结果来彻底改变该领域,包括对象分类,迁移学习,以及使用通过EEG测量的脑源性表示来生成描绘人类感知和思维的图像。我们的新实验和分析表明,他们的结果主要取决于他们使用的块设计,其中给定类的所有刺激一起呈现,并与快速事件设计失败,其中不同类的刺激随机混合。块设计导致基于块级时间相关性的任意大脑状态的分类,所述块级时间相关性倾向于存在于所有EEG数据中,而不是刺激相关的活动。由于测试集中的每个试验都来自于与相应训练集中的许多试验相同的块,因此它们的块设计会导致在测试集上进行秘密训练。这使得在多篇已发表论文中对该数据进行的所有后续分析无效,并对所有声称的结果提出质疑。我们进一步表明,一种新的对象分类器构造的随机码本执行以及或优于一种新的对象分类器构造的表示从EEG数据中提取,这表明,他们的分类器的性能构造的表示从EEG数据中提取的并没有受益于所有从大脑派生的表示。我们的研究结果校准了所涉及的任务的潜在难度,并警告不要耸人听闻和过于乐观,但错误的,相反的说法。

英文摘要:

A recent paper [31] claims to classify brain processing evoked in subjects watching ImageNet stimuli as measured with EEG and to use a representation derived from this processing to create a novel object classifier. That paper, together with a series of subsequent papers [8, 15, 17, 20, 21, 30, 35], claims to revolutionize the field by achieving extremely successful results on several computer-vision tasks, including object classification, transfer learning, and generation of images depicting human perception and thought using brain-derived representations measured through EEG. Our novel experiments and analyses demonstrate that their results crucially depend on the block design that they use, where all stimuli of a given class are presented together, and fail with a rapid-event design, where stimuli of different classes are randomly intermixed. The block design leads to classification of arbitrary brain states based on block-level temporal correlations that tend to exist in all EEG data, rather than stimulus-related activity. Because every trial in their test sets comes from the same block as many trials in the corresponding training sets, their block design thus leads to surreptitiously training on the test set. This invalidates all subsequent analyses performed on this data in multiple published papers and calls into question all of the purported results. We further show that a novel object classifier constructed with a random codebook performs as well as or better than a novel object classifier constructed with the representation extracted from EEG data, suggesting that the performance of their classifier constructed with a representation extracted from EEG data does not benefit at all from the brain-derived representation. Our results calibrate the underlying difficulty of the tasks involved and caution against sensational and overly optimistic, but false, claims to the contrary.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑