Cited by 2,004Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningReinforcement Learning in RoboticsGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis

Return of Frustratingly Easy Domain Adaptation

Open access
Sun, Baochen, Feng, Jiashi, Saenko, Kate·2016·Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

Unlike human learning, machine learning often fails to handle changes between training (source) and test (target) input distributions. Such domain shifts, common in practical scenarios, severely damage the performance of conventional machine learning methods. Supervised domain adaptation methods have been proposed for the case when the target data have labels, including some that perform very well despite being ``frustratingly easy'' to implement. However, in practice, the target domain is often unlabeled, requiring unsupervised adaptation. We propose a simple, effective, and efficient method for unsupervised domain adaptation called CORrelation ALignment (CORAL). CORAL minimizes domain shift by aligning the second-order statistics of source and target distributions, without requiring any target labels. Even though it is extraordinarily simple--it can be implemented in four lines of Matlab code--CORAL performs remarkably well in extensive evaluations on standard benchmark datasets.

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 · 10.1609/aaai.v30i1.10306

Cites

44 of 44 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 core idea of data alignment is to mathematically transform EEG data from different subjects into a shared feature space, reducing distributional discrepancies caused by inter-subject variability and making the data more comparable for model training.

    “The core idea is to mathematically transform the EEG data from different subjects into a shared feature space, thereby reducing the distributional discrepancies caused by inter-subject variability and making the data more comparable for model training (Sun et al., 2016).”

    From Transfer learning for EEG-based BCIs: a comparative evaluation and optimization of data alignment methods (2026) · cites this paper as Sun et al., 2016

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Data alignment is a key strategy within inter-subject transfer learning for EEG-BCIs.

    “A key strategy within inter-subject TL for EEG-BCIs is data alignment.”

    From Transfer learning for EEG-based BCIs: a comparative evaluation and optimization of data alignment methods (2026) · cites this paper as Sun et al., 2016

    Figure 2 (Related Work, p. 2) describes aligning source and target data as a strategy for domain adaptation. The paper does not address EEG-BCIs or inter-subject transfer learning, so it does not establish the claim in that specific setting. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Tommasi, T., and Tuytelaars, T. 2014. A testbed for crossdataset analysis. In ECCV TASK-CV Workshop .

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sun, B., Feng, J., & Saenko, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Massachusetts Lowell (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Published
2016-03-02
Volume
30
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 2159-5399 (ISSN-L)
  • 2374-3468
OpenAlex
W2963275094
Cited by
2,004
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 113 · 2025: 184 · 2024: 246 · 2023: 274 · 2022: 236 · 2021: 315 · 2020: 254 · 2019: 186 · 2018: 125 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
66.62
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • AAAI Publications (The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI)) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1451244, 1212928)
  • Nvidia (Tesla K40)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Keywords
unsupervised domain adaptation, domain shift, coral, unlabeled target data

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