Organizations: College of Computer Science and Technology, Jilin University, Changchun 130012, China · Key Laboratory of Symbolic Computation and Knowledge Engineering of Ministry of Education, Jilin University, Changchun 130012, China · Department of Computer Science, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, USA
Semi-Supervised Text Classification (SSTC) mainly works under the spirit of self-training. They initialize the deep classifier by training over labeled texts; and then alternatively predict unlabeled texts as their pseudo-labels and train the deep classifier over the mixture of labeled and pseudo-labeled texts. Naturally, their performance is largely affected by the accuracy of pseudo-labels for unlabeled texts. Unfortunately, they often suffer from low accuracy because of the margin bias problem caused by the large difference between representation distributions of labels in SSTC. To alleviate this problem, we apply the angular margin loss, and perform several Gaussian linear transformations to achieve balanced label angle variances, i.e., the variance of label angles of texts within the same label. More accuracy of predicted pseudo-labels can be achieved by constraining all label angle variances balanced, where they are estimated over both labeled and pseudo-labeled texts during self-training loops. With this insight, we propose a novel SSTC method, namely Semi-Supervised Text Classification with Balanced Deep representation Distributions (S2TC-BDD). We implement both multi-class classification and multi-label classification versions of S2TC-BDD by introducing some pseudo-labeling tricks and regularization terms. To evaluate S2 TC-BDD, we compare it against the state-of-the-art SSTC methods. Empirical results demonstrate the effectiveness of S2 TC-BDD, especially when the labeled texts are scarce.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: The average difference of label angle variances (Avg.DLAV) computed in semi-supervised and supervised manners across AG News ( Multi-Class Case ) and AAPD ( Multi-Label Case ), respectively.
Fig. 2: Let solid circles and triangles denote labeled positive and negative texts, and hollow ones denote corresponding unlabeled texts. (a) The large difference between label angle variances results in the margin bias. Many unlabeled texts (in red) can be misclassified. (b) Balancing the label angle variances can eliminate the margin bias. Best viewed in color.
Fig. 3: Overview the framework of S 2 tc-bdd . Specially, we employ the pseudo-labeling tricks of Sharpening and Class-distribution-Aware Pseudo-labeling (CAP) for the scenarios of multi-class classification and multi-label classification, respectively. Best viewed in color.
Type
Dataset
K
N
#Dev
#Test
Avg.Labels
Multi- class classification
AG News
4
120,000
8,000
7,600
–
Yelp
5
650,000
10,000
50,000
–
Yahoo
10
700,000
20,000
60,000
–
Multi- label classification
Ohsumed
23
24,089
2,000
10,300
1.66
AAPD
54
54,840
2,000
1,000
2.41
RCV1-V2
103
23,149
2,000
781,265
3.24
TABLE I: Statistics of datasets. K : the number of class labels. N : the number of original training texts. #Dev : the number of development texts. #Test : the number of texts for testing. In addition, we report the average number of category labels per document ( Avg.Labels ) for multi-label benchmarks.
Metric
Dataset
Nl
NB+EM
BERT+CE
BERT+AM -s
BERT+AM -f
VAMPIRE
VAT
UDA
FreeMatch
MetaExpert
S 2 tc-bdd-s
S 2 tc-bdd-f
Micro-F1
AG News
100
0.834
0.839
0.856
0.870
0.705
0.868
0.855
0.862
0.867
0.872
0.876
1,000
0.855
0.878
0.879
0.886
0.833
0.886
0.883
0.882
0.884
0.889
0.889
10,000
0.874
0.905
0.901
0.903
0.876
0.898
0.906
0.915
0.914
0.907
0.917
Yelp
100
0.300
0.344
0.399
0.485
0.227
0.244
0.387
0.491
0.454
0.417
0.496
1,000
0.355
0.538
0.544
0.567
0.476
0.551
0.554
0.565
0.585
0.552
0.589
10,000
0.404
0.583
0.574
0.596
0.551
0.566
0.580
0.618
0.616
0.583
0.619
TABLE II: Experimental results of Micro-F1 and Macro-F1 by varying the number of labeled texts Nl on multi-class benchmarks. The best results are highlighted in boldface.
Metric
Dataset
Nu
NB+EM
BERT+AM -s
BERT+AM -f
VAMPIRE
VAT
UDA
FreeMatch
MetaExpert
S 2 tc-bdd-s
S 2 tc-bdd-f
Micro-F1
AG News
0
0.668
0.844
0.798
–
0.846
0.839
0.859
0.842
0.844
0.750
200
0.696
0.855
0.847
0.329
0.850
0.844
0.854
0.848
0.857
0.835
2,000
0.752
0.856
0.866
0.421
0.870
0.853
0.845
0.859
0.863
0.874
20,000
0.834
0.856
0.870
0.705
0.868
0.855
0.862
0.867
0.872
0.876
Yelp
0
0.317
0.381
0.377
–
0.341
0.344
0.463
0.437
0.395
0.373
200
0.307
0.385
0.420
0.238
0.299
0.397
0.299
0.410
0.403
0.420
TABLE III: Experimental results of Micro-F1 and Macro-F1 by varying the number of unlabeled texts Nu on multi-class benchmarks.
Metric
Dataset
Nl
BERT+BCE
BERT+AM
SDRL
CAP
MetaExpert
S 2 tc-bdd
Micro-F1
Ohsumed
100
0.278
0.421
0.311
0.380
0.418
0.447
1,000
0.583
0.604
0.397
0.571
0.558
0.636
10,000
0.695
0.721
0.443
0.645
0.644
0.726
AAPD
200
0.456
0.543
0.361
0.497
0.525
0.554
2,000
0.623
0.637
0.416
0.625
0.601
0.651
20,000
0.678
0.707
0.440
0.627
0.610
0.707
TABLE IV: Experimental results of Micro-F1 and Macro-F1 by varying the number of labeled texts Nl on multi-label benchmarks. The best results are highlighted in boldface.
Metric
Dataset
Nl
BERT+BCE
BERT+AM
SDRL
CAP
MetaExpert
S 2 tc-bdd
Ranking Loss
Ohsumed
100
0.246
0.208
0.249
0.199
0.192
0.184
1,000
0.094
0.099
0.205
0.089
0.091
0.083
10,000
0.045
0.049
0.172
0.045
0.049
0.049
AAPD
200
0.121
0.110
0.196
0.096
0.096
0.105
2,000
0.063
0.061
0.160
0.051
0.073
0.056
20,000
0.037
0.035
0.137
0.037
0.041
0.038
TABLE V: Experimental results of the ranking loss and average precision (AP) by varying the number of labeled texts Nl on multi-label benchmarks. The best results are highlighted in boldface.
Metric
Dataset
Nu
BERT+AM
SDRL
CAP
MetaExpert
S 2 tc-bdd
Micro-F1
Ohsumed
0
0.415
0.308
0.373
0.389
0.433
100
0.414
0.316
0.370
0.350
0.424
1,000
0.415
0.310
0.378
0.371
0.435
10,000
0.421
0.311
0.380
0.418
0.447
AAPD
0
0.531
0.372
0.486
0.491
0.535
200
0.534
0.371
0.488
0.505
0.539
TABLE VI: Experimental results of Micro-F1 and Macro-F1 by varying the number of unlabeled texts Nu on multi-label benchmarks. The best results are highlighted in boldface.
Metric
Dataset
Nu
BERT+AM
SDRL
CAP
MetaExpert
S 2 tc-bdd
Ranking Loss
Ohsumed
0
0.195
0.253
0.213
0.234
0.192
100
0.200
0.251
0.206
0.205
0.189
1,000
0.198
0.256
0.207
0.205
0.187
10,000
0.208
0.249
0.199
0.192
0.184
AAPD
0
0.103
0.193
0.112
0.116
0.104
200
0.106
0.190
0.110
0.107
0.102
TABLE VII: Experimental results of the ranking loss and average precision (AP) by varying the number of unlabeled texts Nu on multi-label benchmarks. The best results are highlighted in boldface.
Model
Multi-class ( -s )
Multi-class ( -f )
Multi-label
Micro-F1
Macro-F1
Micro-F1
Macro-F1
Micro-F1
Macro-F1
Ranking Loss
AP
S 2 tc-bdd
0.872
0.872
0.876
0.876
0.447
0.308
0.184
0.560
-regularization
0.863
0.864
0.874
0.873
0.428
0.305
0.195
0.544
-BDD
0.856
0.856
0.870
0.870
0.421
0.298
0.208
0.535
-unlabeled texts
0.844
0.843
0.750
0.751
0.433
0.266
0.192
0.544
-all
0.839
0.840
0.839
0.840
0.384
0.222
0.220
0.494
TABLE VIII: Classification performance on the multi-class text classification benchmark AG News with 100 labeled data and 20,000 unlabeled data, and the multi-label text classification benchmark Ohsumed with 100 labeled data and 10,000 unlabeled data after removing different parts of S 2 tc-bdd .
Fig. 4: The accuracy of pseudo-labels during the training procedure with or without BDD loss (w/ BDD and w/o BDD) across AG News ( Multi-Class Case , Nl=100,Nu=20000 ) and AAPD ( Multi-Label Case , Nl=200,Nu=20000 ), respectively.
Semi-supervised learning faces significant challenges in realistic scenarios where labeled data is scarce and unlabeled data follows unknown, arbitrary distributions. We formalize this critical yet under-explored paradigm as Universal Semi-supervised Learning (UniSSL). Existing methods typically leverage unlabeled data via pseudo-labeling. However, they often rely on the idealized assumption of a uniform unlabeled data distribution or require sufficient labeled data to estimate it. In the UniSSL setting, such dependencies lead to numerous erroneous pseudo-labels, thereby triggering representation confusion. Fortunately, we observe that inter-sample relations captured by representations are more reliable than pseudo-labels. Leveraging this insight, we shift our focus to representation-level structural inference to bypass distribution estimation. Accordingly, we propose Simplex Anchored Graph-state Equipartition (SAGE), which captures high-order inter-sample dependencies to establish structural consensus for guiding representation learning. Meanwhile, to mitigate representation confusion, we employ vectors that satisfy a simplex equiangular tight frame to serve as a coordinate frame for guiding inter-class representation separation. Finally, we introduce a weighting strategy based on distribution-agnostic metrics to prioritize reliable pseudo-labels and an auxiliary branch to isolate potentially erroneous pseudo-labels. Evaluations on five standard benchmarks show that SAGE consistently outperforms state-of-the-art methods, with an average accuracy gain of \textbf{8.52%}.
Yaxin Hou, Jun Ma, Hanyang Li +3
School of Computer Science and Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, China. · School of Electrical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, China. · Key Laboratory of New Generation Artificial Intelligence Technology and Its Interdisciplinary Applications (Southeast University), Ministry of Education, Nanjing, China.
Semi-supervised learning (SSL) often suffers under class imbalance, where pseudo-labeling amplifies majority bias and suppresses minority performance. We address this issue with a lightweight framework that, to our knowledge, is the first to introduce Proportion Loss from learning from label proportions (LLP) into SSL as a regularization term. Proportion Loss aligns model predictions with the global class distribution, mitigating bias across both majority and minority classes. To further stabilize training, we formulate a stochastic variant that accounts for fluctuations in mini-batch composition. Experiments on the Long-tailed CIFAR-10 benchmark show that integrating Proportion Loss into FixMatch and ReMixMatch consistently improves performance over the baselines across imbalance severities and label ratios, and achieves competitive or superior results compared to existing CISSL methods, particularly under scarce-label conditions.
Long-tailed distributions are prevalent in real-world semi-supervised learning (SSL), where pseudo-labels tend to favor majority classes, leading to degraded generalization. While many long-tailed semi-supervised learning (LTSSL) methods have been proposed, the mechanisms by which they implicitly debias logits remain poorly understood. In this work, we revisit LTSSL through the lens of learning dynamics and provide a theoretical characterization of logits debiasing. Specifically, we derive a step-wise decomposition of the logits updates, showing that predictions are dominated by class-imbalance bias that reliably reflects label priors. To expose this effect, we use the logits of a task-irrelevant baseline image as an indicator of accumulated bias and prove that they converge to the class prior. This provides a unified view where LTSSL remedies such as logit adjustment, reweighting, and resampling correspond to reshaping gradient dynamics. Based on this insight, we propose DyTrim, a principle-based dynamic pruning framework that reallocates gradient budget through class-aware pruning on labeled data and confidence-based soft pruning on unlabeled data. We provide theoretical guarantees that DyTrim reduces class bias and improves generalization. Extensive experiments on standard LTSSL benchmarks show consistent gains across architectures and methods. Code available at: https://jiajun0425.github.io/DyTrim
Yue Cheng, Jiajun Zhang, Xiaohui Gao +2
Beijing Jiaotong University · AntGroup · Northwestern Polytechnical University +1