PapersWithELO
← ICLR 2024 leaderboard

Modulate Your Spectrum in Self-Supervised Learning

Xi Weng, Yunhao Ni, Tengwei Song, Jie Luo, Rao Muhammad Anwer, Salman Khan, Fahad Khan, Lei Huang

self/semi-supervised learningself-supervised learningwhiteningdimensional collapsespectral transformationiterative normalization
87.50100
Fused
band ≈ ±15 pct pts (from σ = 0.30)
83.10100
Mimo
band ≈ ±21 pct pts (from σ = 0.41)
91.80100
DeepSeek
band ≈ ±22 pct pts (from σ = 0.44)

OpenReview ground truth

Accepted

TL;DR — The proposed INTL is well motivated, theoretically demonstrated, and empirically validated in avoiding dimensional collapse, and is a promising SSL method in practice.

Abstract

Whitening loss offers a theoretical guarantee against feature collapse in self-supervised learning (SSL) with joint embedding architectures. Typically, it involves a hard whitening approach, transforming the embedding and applying loss to the whitened output. In this work, we introduce Spectral Transformation (ST), a framework to modulate the spectrum of embedding and to seek for functions beyond whitening that can avoid dimensional collapse. We show that whitening is a special instance of ST by definition, and our empirical investigations unveil other ST instances capable of preventing collapse. Additionally, we propose a novel ST instance named IterNorm with trace loss (INTL). Theoretical analysis confirms INTL's efficacy in preventing collapse and modulating the spectrum of embedding toward equal-eigenvalues during optimization. Our experiments on ImageNet classification and COCO object detection demonstrate INTL's potential in learning superior representations. The code is available at https://github.com/winci-ai/INTL.

Author context

Most prolific author: 6 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.

Judge assessments

Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 38)