BoSS: A Best-of-Strategies Selector as an Oracle for Deep Active Learning
Authors: Denis Huseljic, Paul Hahn, Marek Herde, Christoph Sandrock, Bernhard Sick
Organizations: Intelligent Embedded Systems University of Kassel Kassel, Hesse, Germany · Machine Learning Research Unit TU Wien Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Active learning (AL) aims to reduce annotation costs while maximizing model performance by iteratively selecting valuable instances. While foundation models have made it easier to identify these instances, existing selection strategies still lack robustness across different models, annotation budgets, and datasets. To highlight the potential weaknesses of existing AL strategies and provide a reference point for research, we explore oracle strategies, i.e., strategies that approximate the optimal selection by accessing ground-truth information unavailable in practical AL scenarios. Current oracle strategies, however, fail to scale effectively to large datasets and complex deep neural networks. To tackle these limitations, we introduce the Best-of-Strategy Selector (BoSS), a scalable oracle strategy designed for large-scale AL scenarios. BoSS constructs a set of candidate batches through an ensemble of selection strategies and then selects the batch yielding the highest performance gain. As an ensemble of selection strategies, BoSS can be easily extended with new state-of-the-art strategies as they emerge, ensuring it remains a reliable oracle strategy in the future. Our evaluation demonstrates that i) BoSS outperforms existing oracle strategies, ii) state-of-the-art AL strategies still fall noticeably short of oracle performance, especially in large-scale datasets with many classes, and iii) one possible solution to counteract the inconsistent performance of AL strategies might be to employ an ensemble-based approach for the selection.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Accuracy improvement over random sampling for BoSS and state-of-the-art selection strategies using DINOv2-ViT-S/14.
Table 2
Time Complexity
Recommended
# Processed Training
Oracle Strategy
per Batch
Hyperparameters
Instances
CDO ( Werner et al., 2024 )
O(m⋅∑i=1btrain-eval(θ,L+i,E))
m=20
20⋅(b⋅∣L∣+2b(b+1))
SAS ( Zhou et al., 2021 )
O((s+g)⋅A⋅train-eval(θ,L+b,E))
s=1,250,g=250
1,500⋅A⋅(∣L∣+b)
BoSS
O(T⋅train-eval(θ,L+b,E))
T=100
10⋅∣S∣⋅(∣L∣+b)
Table 2: Summary of time complexities of oracle strategies.
Dataset
# Classes ( K )
Batch Size ( b )
CIFAR-10 ( 2009 )
10
10
STL-10 ( 2011 )
10
10
Snacks ( 2021 )
20
20
Flowers102 ( 2008 )
102
25
Dopanim ( 2024 )
15
50
DTD ( 2014 )
47
50
Table 3: Overview of datasets, showing number of classes K and batch size b .
Oracle
Default
CIFAR-10 ( b=10 )
Snacks ( b=20 )
Dopanim ( b=50 )
DTD ( b=50 )
BoSS
T=100
T=100
T=100
T=100
T=100
CDO
m=20
m=20
m=10
m=4
m=3
SAS
s=25,000,g=5,000
s=250,g=10
s=225,g=10
s=215,g=10
s=150,g=10
Table 4: Hyperparameters of oracle strategies under runtime constraints equivalent to BoSS.
Oracle
Cifar-10
Snacks
Dopanim
DTD
BoSS
10:07
13:19
30:47
22:07
CDO (Adapted)
10:26
14:11
33:25
24:56
SAS (Adapted)
10:20
13:24
31:56
22:14
CDO (Default)
10:26
28:22
2:47:08
2:46:14
SAS (Default)
17:22:39
24:19:42
61:52:42
62:34:13
Table 5: Empirical runtimes of oracle strategies with adapted and default hyperparameters.
Figure 2: Relative learning curves of oracle strategies with aligned runtimes using DINOv2-ViT-S/14.
Figure 3: Relative learning curves achieved by BoSS and state-of-the-art selection strategies at each annotation cycle for different pretrained models.
Figure 4: Average relative pick frequency of AL strategies by BoSS across cycles averaged over all datasets.
Figure 5: Relative learning curves of BoSS with naively selected candidate batches vs. our algorithm.
Table 11
Appendix figures & tables13 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 6: Explanatory plot of the “new” strategy DropQuery in relation to both random and BoSS.
Figure 7: Relative learning curves and pick frequencies with (Vary) and without (No Vary) varying the subset size for candidate batch generation.
Figure 8: Average pick choices of BoSS with three selection strategies on CIFAR-100 and Food101.
Figure 9: Relative pick frequencies of selection strategies by BoSS per dataset averaged over cycles, here given with the numeric value (in %).
Figure 10: Relative learning curves of BoSS and its runtime-optimized variants.
Figure 11: Absolute learning curves of oracle strategies with aligned runtimes using DINOv2-ViT-S/14.
Figure 12: Relative learning curves of oracle strategies with default hyperparameters using DINOv2-ViT-S/14.
Figure 13: Absolute learning curves achieved by BoSS and state-of-the-art selection strategies at each annotation cycle for different pretrained models.
CIFAR-10
STL-10
Snacks
Flowers102
Dopanim
DTD
Food101
CIFAR-100
Tiny ImageNet
ImageNet
Random
0.713
0.763
0.707
0.548
0.612
0.531
0.538
0.531
0.496
0.500
Margin
0.745
0.813
0.740
0.630
0.628
0.550
0.539
0.544
0.513
0.513
CoreSets
0.693
0.759
0.668
0.680
0.525
0.519
0.503
0.543
0.508
0.501
BADGE
0.748
0.810
0.742
0.640
0.626
0.555
0.546
0.550
0.512
0.519
TypiClust
0.777
0.825
0.776
0.721
0.629
0.587
0.571
0.577
0.546
0.503
DropQuery
0.789
0.862
0.792
0.693
0.629
0.584
0.576
0.567
0.546
0.530
Appendix
Table 11: AULC for the low-budget regime across vision datasets using DINOv2 features.
CIFAR-10
STL-10
Snacks
Flowers102
Dopanim
DTD
Food101
CIFAR-100
Tiny ImageNet
ImageNet
Random
0.893
0.931
0.869
0.889
0.747
0.695
0.725
0.715
0.681
0.662
Margin
0.916
0.979
0.888
0.980
0.765
0.722
0.736
0.732
0.687
0.674
CoreSets
0.886
0.949
0.835
0.967
0.658
0.701
0.671
0.711
0.669
0.647
BADGE
0.919
0.979
0.888
0.981
0.760
0.726
0.744
0.736
0.695
0.677
TypiClust
0.913
0.961
0.882
0.981
0.748
0.721
0.729
0.736
0.693
0.662
DropQuery
0.919
0.981
0.900
0.973
0.756
0.709
0.740
0.731
0.692
0.675
Appendix
Table 12: AULC for the mid-budget regime across vision datasets using DINOv2 features.
CIFAR-10
STL-10
Snacks
Flowers102
Dopanim
DTD
Food101
CIFAR-100
Tiny ImageNet
ImageNet
Random
0.919
0.959
0.889
0.972
0.774
0.734
0.770
0.759
0.720
0.696
Margin
0.936
0.988
0.910
0.993
0.793
0.760
0.777
0.771
0.726
0.707
CoreSets
0.919
0.977
0.879
0.989
0.710
0.746
0.726
0.751
0.710
0.682
BADGE
0.938
0.987
0.911
0.993
0.789
0.759
0.784
0.775
0.731
0.708
TypiClust
0.930
0.971
0.892
0.990
0.768
0.749
0.770
0.766
0.725
0.695
DropQuery
0.933
0.986
0.911
0.990
0.778
0.740
0.774
0.763
0.722
0.704
Appendix
Table 13: AULC for the high-budget regime across vision datasets using DINOv2 features.
Figure 14: Learning curves of BoSS and state-of-the-art selection strategies across annotation cycles on four text classification datasets using MiniLM features.
Figure 15: Learning curves of BoSS and its variants with reduced supervision: without supervised strategies (Unsup.) and with approximate supervision (Approx.).
Real-world deployment of active learning typically forces practitioners to choose an acquisition strategy before any data is labeled. This is a daunting task: strategy performance varies widely across settings (e.g. datasets, surrogate models) and cannot be assessed without deployment. Existing strategy selection methods explore one strategy from a portfolio at each round and identify the optimal one using bandit feedback or model retraining. Many acquisition rounds are therefore spent exploring strategies rather than collecting the most informative data. Such overhead is a major barrier to AL-driven design of high-throughput experiments, such as genetic perturbation screens and directed evolution, where AL runs consist of only a few rounds with large batch sizes. This regime permits a natural alternative: acquiring data using multiple AL strategies within a single batch. We refer to this as soft strategy selection and introduce FractAL, a method specifically designed for this task. FractAL infers a per-strategy reward using influence-function-based data attribution, which requires no additional retraining, and then computes budget shares for each strategy in the portfolio using online mirror descent. We benchmark FractAL across 7 setups spanning classification, regression, and genetic perturbation effect prediction. The results highlight that strategy selection is a hard problem: every existing method performs worse than random sampling on at least one setup. FractAL, however, matches or outperforms every baseline, including random sampling, on all 7 setups. Its allocations concentrate budget on the strongest strategies in the portfolio while pruning the weakest. FractAL is therefore a reliable choice for real-world deployments, where the optimal strategy is unknown in advance, an important step towards making AL practical for high-throughput experiments and modern scientific discovery.
Rushil Gupta, Romain Lopez
Department of Computer Science, Courant Institute School of Mathematics, Computing, and Data Science, New York University · Department of Biology, New York University
The challenge with active learning algorithms is the uncertainty of the statistical distribution of unlabeled data, making it difficult to choose the best hand-crafted strategy. To address this, we introduced Contextual Adaptive Active Learning (CAAL). In CAAL, each "arm" represents a hand-crafted strategy. Unlike existing frameworks that select strategies based only on feedback from labeled data, we dynamically choose strategies for labeling batches of data using reward prediction with external context information. This general framework allows for customization with domain knowledge to design more effective rewards and context candidates. In addition, we experimentally show that CAAL outperforms the existing baseline adaptive strategy on public datasets using our reward and context design. Our results are consistent regardless of batch size in each iteration.
Shao-An Yin, Jiacong Li, Tianpei Xie +3
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, USA · Jiacong Li, Tianpei Xie, Cecile Levasseur, and Wojciech Kowalinski are with Amazon.
Active learning algorithms automatically identify the most informative samples from large amounts of unlabeled data and tremendously reduce human annotation effort in inducing a machine learning model. In a conventional active learning setup, the labeling oracles are assumed to be infallible, that is, they always provide correct answers (in terms of class labels) to the queried unlabeled instances, which cannot be guaranteed in real-world applications. To this end, a body of research has focused on the development of active learning algorithms in the presence of imperfect / noisy oracles. Existing research on active learning with noisy oracles typically simulate the oracles using machine learning models; however, real-world situations are much more challenging, and using ML models to simulate the annotation patterns may not appropriately capture the nuances of real-world annotation challenges. In this research, we first collect annotations of text samples (from 3 benchmark text classification datasets) from crowd-sourced workers through a crowd-sourcing platform. We then conduct extensive empirical studies of 8 commonly used active learning techniques (in conjunction with deep neural networks) using the obtained annotations. Our analyses sheds light on the performance of these techniques under real-world challenges, where annotators can provide incorrect labels, and can also refuse to provide labels. We hope this research will provide valuable insights that will be useful for the deployment of deep active learning systems in real-world applications. The obtained annotations can be accessed at https://github.com/varuntotakura/al_rcta/.
Varun Totakura, Ankita Singh, Yushun Dong +1
Department of Computer Science Florida State University Tallahassee, FL, USA