Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

Self-Training With Noisy Student Improves ImageNet Classification

Qizhe Xie, Minh-Thang Luong, Eduard Hovy, Quoc V. LePublished Jun 1, 2020
DOI Publisher
Researcher verdict
Context only
Use as context only
Benchmark evidence
Thin evidence
Verify before relying
Time to first repro
A few days
Plan setup time
Risk flags
2
Review before use

Abstract

Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.

We present a simple self-training method that achieves 88.4% top-1 accuracy on ImageNet, which is 2.0% better than the state-of-the-art model that requires 3.5B weakly labeled Instagram images. On robustness test sets, it improves ImageNet-A top-1 accuracy from 61.0% to 83.7%, reduces ImageNet-C mean corruption error from 45.7 to 28.3, and reduces ImageNet-P mean flip rate from 27.8 to 12.2. To achieve this result, we first train an EfficientNet model on labeled ImageNet images and use it as a teacher to generate pseudo labels on 300M unlabeled images. We then train a larger EfficientNet as a student model on the combination of labeled and pseudo labeled images. We iterate this process by putting back the student as the teacher. During the generation of the pseudo labels, the teacher is not noised so that the pseudo labels are as accurate as possible. However, during the learning of the student, we inject noise such as dropout, stochastic depth and data augmentation via RandAugment to the student so that the student generalizes better than the teacher.

Results and benchmarks

Freshness tier: cold
We present a simple self-training method that achieves 88.4% top-1 accuracy on ImageNet, which is 2.0% better than the state-of-the-art model that requires 3.5B weakly labeled Instagram images.

Implementation

No direct implementation yet

Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.

Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.

Implementation evidence summary
Confidence: low

Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.

Reproduction risks
  • Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow

Reproduction readiness

Time to first repro: days
Last checked: Aug 25, 2026

No repo

No verified implementation available

  • No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.

Hardware requirements

  • Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.

Hugging Face artifacts

No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.

Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.

Research context

2,319

Citations

163

References

Tasks

Robustness (evolution), Computer science, Dropout (neural networks), Training set, Noise (video), Process (computing), Training (meteorology), Contextual image classification

Methods

None detected

Domains

Artificial intelligence, Machine learning, Image (mathematics), Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Evaluation and human feedback data

Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.

Open in HFEPX
Explore similar papers