The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Deep Multi-view Information Bottleneck
Abstract
In many classification problems, the predictions can be enhanced by fusing information from different data views. In particular, when the information from different views complement each other, it is expected that multi-view learning will lead to improved predictive performance. In this paper, we proposed a supervised multi-view learning framework based on the information bottleneck principle to filter out irrelevant and noisy information from multiple views and learn an accurate joint representation. Specifically, our proposed method maximizes the mutual information between the labels and the learned joint representation while minimizing the mutual information between the learned latent representation of each view and the original data representation. As the relationships between different views are often complicated and nonlinear, we employed deep neural networks to learn the latent representation and to disentangle their complex dependencies. However, since the computation of mutual information can be intractable, we employed the variational inference method to efficiently solve the optimization problem. We performed extensive experiments on various synthetic and real-world datasets to demonstrate the effectiveness of the framework.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
Using the reparameterization trick transfers the randomness to ε and allows the gradients of the parameters to be explicitly computed.
“By using the reparameterization trick, the randomness is transferred to ϵ and the gradients of the parameters can be explicitly computed.”
From Multimodal Information Bottleneck: Learning Minimal Sufficient Unimodal and Multimodal Representations (2023) · cites this paper as [46]
PoE assumes that experts with greater confidence are modalities whose information bears less uncertainty and is more relevant to the target.
“PoE assumes the experts with greater confidence are the modalities whose information bears less uncertainty and is more relevant to the target.”
From Multimodal Information Bottleneck: Learning Minimal Sufficient Unimodal and Multimodal Representations (2023) · cites this paper as [46]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mai, S., Zeng, Y., & Hu, H. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Multimedia · doi:10.1109/tmm.2022.3171679 · Cited by 182
Metadata
- Authors
- Wang, Q., Boudreau, C., Luo, Q., Tan, P.-N., & Zhou, J.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2019 SIAM International Conference on Data Mining
- Published
- 2019-05-06
- Pages
- 37-45
- OpenAlex
- W2944150796
- Cited by
- 77
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 2.20
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Algorithms
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face and Expression Recognition
- Keywords
- multi-view learning, information bottleneck, joint representation learning, mutual information maximization, variational inference, deep neural network, classification
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