Multi-Task Self-Training for Learning General Representations
Abstract
Despite the fast progress in training specialized models for various tasks, learning a single general model that works well for many tasks is still challenging for computer vision. Here we introduce multi-task self-training (MuST), which harnesses the knowledge in independent specialized teacher models (e.g., ImageNet model on classification) to train a single general student model. Our approach has three steps. First, we train specialized teachers independently on labeled datasets. We then use the specialized teachers to label an unlabeled dataset to create a multi-task pseudo labeled dataset. Finally, the dataset, which now contains pseudo labels from teacher models trained on different datasets/tasks, is then used to train a student model with multi-task learning. We evaluate the feature representations of the student model on 6 vision tasks including image recognition (classification, detection, segmentation) and 3D geometry estimation (depth and surface normal estimation). MuST is scalable with unlabeled or partially labeled datasets and outperforms both specialized supervised models and self-supervised models when training on large scale datasets. Lastly, we show MuST can improve upon already strong checkpoints [23] trained with billions of examples. The results suggest self-training is a promising direction to aggregate labeled and unlabeled training data for learning general feature representations.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Masked Autoencoders (MAEs) are a powerful, conceptually simple and efficient self-supervised pre-training strategy for Vision Transformers (ViTs).
“Masked Autoencoders (MAEs) [35] have recently been demonstrated to be a powerful, yet conceptually simple and efficient, self-supervised pre-training strategy for Vision Transformers [26] (ViTs).”
From MultiMAE: Multi-modal Multi-task Masked Autoencoders (2022) · cites this paper as [26]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 66 · Cited by 84
- Authors
- Ghiasi, G., Zoph, B., Cubuk, E. D., Le, Q. V., & Lin, T.-Y.
- Affiliations
- Google (United States) (US)
- Venue
- 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2021-10
- Pages
- 8836-8845
- OpenAlex
- W3204397973
- Cited by
- 84
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 6.93
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Algorithms
- Keywords
- pseudo-labeling, teacher-student models, multi-task learning, unlabeled data, semi-supervised learning, image classification, object detection, semantic segmentation, depth estimation, surface normal estimation
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