Cited by 499Adversarial Robustness in Machine LearningDigital Media Forensic DetectionAdvanced Neural Network Applications

Generalized ODIN: Detecting Out-of-Distribution Image Without Learning From Out-of-Distribution Data

Open access
Hsu, Yen-Chang, Shen, Yilin, Jin, Hongxia, Kira, Zsolt·2020·2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

Abstract

Deep neural networks have attained remarkable performance when applied to data that comes from the same distribution as that of the training set, but can significantly degrade otherwise. Therefore, detecting whether an example is out-of-distribution (OoD) is crucial to enable a system that can reject such samples or alert users. Recent works have made significant progress on OoD benchmarks consisting of small image datasets. However, many recent methods based on neural networks rely on training or tuning with both in-distribution and out-of-distribution data. The latter is generally hard to define a-priori, and its selection can easily bias the learning. We base our work on a popular method ODIN, proposing two strategies for freeing it from the needs of tuning with OoD data, while improving its OoD detection performance. We specifically propose to decompose confidence scoring as well as a modified input pre-processing method. We show that both of these significantly help in detection performance. Our further analysis on a larger scale image dataset shows that the two types of distribution shifts, specifically semantic shift and non-semantic shift, present a significant difference in the difficulty of the problem, providing an analysis of when ODIN-like strategies do or do not work.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.01096

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The perturbation magnitude in G-ODIN is determined on a small held-out validation set.

    “The perturbation magnitude is determined on a small held-out validation set.”

    From QUTE: Quantifying Uncertainty in TinyML with Early-exit-assisted ensembles for model-monitoring (2024) · cites this paper as Hsu et al., 2020

    Section 4.1 (page unavailable) says the classifier is trained on an in-distribution training set and the perturbation magnitude is then tuned on a separate in-distribution validation set. Section 3.2 (page unavailable) likewise says the magnitude is selected using only that validation set. The copy does not establish that the validation set is small. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • General OOD-detectors are not automatically effective for CID detection.

    “This suggests that general OOD-detectors are not automatically effective for CID detection”

    From QUTE: Quantifying Uncertainty in TinyML with Early-exit-assisted ensembles for model-monitoring (2024) · cites this paper as Hsu et al., 2020

    Section 4.3 (page unavailable) shows that OOD-detector performance varies by type of distribution shift and reports that Mahalanobis* performed worse than the baseline in most DomainNet cases. This supports the caution that general OOD detectors are not automatically effective, but the paper does not identify or evaluate CID detection specifically. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • G-ODIN is a generalized OOD detection method that decomposes the confidence score and introduces a preprocessing layer that perturbs inputs for better OOD detection.

    “Generalized-ODIN (G-ODIN) (Hsu et al., 2020): a generalized OOD detection method that decomposes the confidence score and introduces a preprocessing layer that perturbs the inputs for better OOD detection.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 45 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Corinna Cortes, Giulia DeSalvo, and Mehryar Mohri. Learn- ing with rejection. In International Conference on Algorith- mic Learning Theory, pages 67-82. Springer, 2016.
  2. Gao Huang, Zhuang Liu, Laurens Van Der Maaten, and Kil- ian Q Weinberger. Densely connected convolutional net- works. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 4700-4708, 2017.
  3. Andrey Malinin, Bruno Mlodozeniec, and Mark Gales. En- semble distribution distillation. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2019.
  4. Alireza Shafaei, Mark Schmidt, and James Little. A less biased evaluation of ood sample detectors. In Proceedings of the British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC), 2019.
  5. Sergey Zagoruyko and Nikos Komodakis. Wide residual net- works. arXiv preprint arXiv:1605.07146, 2016. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hsu, Y.-C., Shen, Y., Jin, H., & Kira, Z.
Affiliations
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
  • Samsung (United States) (US)
Venue
2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2020-06
Pages
10948-10957
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3034230713
Cited by
499
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 83 · 2024: 98 · 2023: 114 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 92 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 1
FWCI
26.61
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Media Forensic Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
out-of-distribution detection, Odin, confidence calibration, distribution shift, semantic change, image classification, anomaly detection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review