PapersWithELO
← ICLR 2024 leaderboard

KEFI: Kernel-based Feature Identification for Generalizable Classification

Long Tung Vuong, Chuanxia Zheng, Manh Luong, Thanh-Toan Do, Trung Le, Dinh Phung

self/semi-supervised learningRepresentation LearningDomain generalizationImage classification
3.30100
Fused
band ≈ ±13 pct pts (from σ = 0.27)
4.90100
Mimo
band ≈ ±20 pct pts (from σ = 0.40)
3.00100
DeepSeek
band ≈ ±18 pct pts (from σ = 0.35)

OpenReview ground truth

Rejected

Abstract

To achieve satisfactory generalization performance on previously unseen domains, existing domain generalization (DG) methods often assume fixed domain-invariant features from a set of training domains for good generalization on new domains. However, this assumption can be overly strict, especially when the source domains lack shared information or when the target domains utilize information from selective source domains in a compositional manner. This leads to the natural question of how we utilize information from the source domain to the target domain in an appropriate way. In response to this challenge, we propose an innovative framework that includes an attribute-based feature extractor that captures from the source domains semantically meaningful components referred to as \textit{attributes} and a \textit{Kernel-based Attribute Identifier} that leverages kernel learning theory to define the decision boundaries for these attributes collected from the source domains. This dynamic learning approach empowers the classifier to effectively identify the learned attributes in the domains it has not encountered before. We empirically validate our method on well-established DG benchmarks, achieving competitive results compared to state-of-the-art techniques.

Author context

Most prolific author: 9 submissions (credibility 1.00).

No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).

Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.

Ranking trajectory

Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.

Battle history — 42 comparisons

Ranked above opponent in 37% of matchups.

Judge assessments

Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 42)