Cited by 7,436Neural Networks and ApplicationsFace and Expression RecognitionMachine Learning and Data Classification

Extracting and composing robust features with denoising autoencoders

Vincent, Pascal, Larochelle, Hugo, Bengio, Yoshua, Manzagol, Pierre-Antoine·2008·Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Machine learning - ICML '08

Abstract

Previous work has shown that the difficulties in learning deep generative or discriminative models can be overcome by an initial unsupervised learning step that maps inputs to useful intermediate representations. We introduce and motivate a new training principle for unsupervised learning of a representation based on the idea of making the learned representations robust to partial corruption of the input pattern. This approach can be used to train autoencoders, and these denoising autoencoders can be stacked to initialize deep architectures. The algorithm can be motivated from a manifold learning and information theoretic perspective or from a generative model perspective. Comparative experiments clearly show the surprising advantage of corrupting the input of autoencoders on a pattern classification benchmark suite. 1.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/1390156.1390294

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • If the cross entropy score comparison becomes nonnegative when introducing x_t, then (4) defines a decision boundary in latent space over robustness to partial destruction of the input.

    “Proposition 3.2.If the cross entropy score comparison becomes nonnegative when introducing the vector x t , then 4 defines a decision boundary in the latent space over the measure of robustness to partial destruction of the input (Vincent et al., 2008;Srivastava et al., 2014), i.e.:”

    From Novelty Detection in Reinforcement Learning with World Models (2023) · cites this paper as Vincent et al., 2008

  • If the cross entropy score comparison becomes nonnegative when introducing the vector x_t, then 4 defines a decision boundary in the latent space over the measure of robustness to partial destruction of the input.

    “Proposition 3.2 (restated) If the cross entropy score comparison becomes nonnegative when introducing the vector x t , then 4 defines a decision boundary in the latent space over the measure of robustness to partial destruction of the input (Vincent et al., 2008;Srivastava et al., 2014), i.e:”

    From Novelty Detection in Reinforcement Learning with World Models (2023) · cites this paper as Vincent et al., 2008

  • The sub-sampling technique is somewhat similar to denoising where a subset of inputs are partially destructed to encourage robust representations in autoencoders.

    “Our sub-sampling technique is somewhat similar to denoising [31, 18] where a subset of inputs are 'partially destructed”
  • For the same clinical task, a similar workflow has been adapted by researchers, but applying denoising AEs instead.

    “For the same clinical task, a similar workflow has been adapted by researchers, but applying denoising AEs (DAEs) [91] instead [35, 36].”
  • The denoising autoencoder architecture allows obtaining useful and robust features in the presence of unstable environments such as IoT systems, in which edge devices may succumb to physical disturbances at the control and communication layers.

    “This architecture allows us to obtain useful and robust features in the presence of unstable environments such as IoT systems, in which edge devices may succumb to physical disturbances at the control and communication layers.”

    From Deep learning-enabled anomaly detection for IoT systems (2023) · cites this paper as [14]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vincent, P., Larochelle, H., Bengio, Y., & Manzagol, P.-A.
Affiliations
Université de Montréal (CA)
Venue
Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Machine learning - ICML '08
Publisher
ACM Press
Published
2008
Pages
1096-1103
OpenAlex
W2025768430
Cited by
7,436
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 270 · 2025: 532 · 2024: 622 · 2023: 668 · 2022: 685 · 2021: 834 · 2020: 837 · 2019: 798 · 2018: 613 · 2017: 511 · 2016: 371 · 2015: 294 · 2014: 178 · 2013: 102 · 2012: 50
FWCI
17.08
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Conference on Machine Learning (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face and Expression Recognition
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
Keywords
denoising autoencoder, robust feature extraction, unsupervised feature learning, stacked autoencoder, manifold learning, information theory, pattern 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