arXiv preprint ·
Are Coreset Selection Methods Worth Their Cost?
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Coreset selection picks a representative subset of the labeled training set to make training cheaper. However, it is usually evaluated by downstream accuracy at a fixed subset size, ignoring both the time spent selecting the subset and the training recipe behind each reported number. We introduce an end-to-end benchmark that standardizes downstream training and charges selection and training to the same auditable wall-clock budget, spanning 4 datasets from CIFAR-10 to ImageNet-1K, 11 selectors, 5 fractions, and 3 seeds, with over 1,500 released runs. Repeated-sampling work has shown that budget-aware evaluation already favors random strategies. Our two budget studies test whether that verdict survives when every selector is granted its most favorable operating point. Across eight wall-clock budget anchors on each of CIFAR-10 and Tiny ImageNet, no anchor is won by a sophisticated selector: every winner is class-balanced random sampling, repeated random sampling, or full-data training. In fixed-budget duels on ImageNet-1K, training on all data for fewer epochs beats every selection strategy we probe while also costing the least. A per-dataset cost audit shows that selection cost is dominated at every scale by a fixed full-dataset scan, so it cannot be amortized away by selecting a smaller fraction, and its absolute size does not extrapolate from one dataset to another. We further quantify when selection does pay back through subset reuse, and document 9 correctness fixes to a widely used codebase, one of which shifts a standard Herding baseline by nearly 6 points. Selection time is not free preprocessing, and an evaluation that ignores it measures the wrong quantity.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Machine Learning
PanoSeg3R: Feed-Forward 3D Semantic Segmentation for Panoramic Images with an Automatic Data Curation Pipeline
Knowing When to Trust Images: Reliability-Aware Multi-modal Entity Alignment
Vision2CAD: A Visual Agent Harness for Explicit Geometry Referencing and Localization in Parametric CAD Modeling
Blind Deconvolution of Binary and Pattern Images with Pixel Intensity Constraints and Sparse Gradient Prior
DOA-SORT: Directional Occlusion-Aware Multi-Object Tracking with Distributional Observations
Get the few papers worth your time in Machine Learning every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.