Organizations: Department of Computer Science, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
Abstract
Synthetic instance-dependent label noise (IDN) benchmarks are widely used to evaluate noisy-label learning methods, yet existing approaches typically generate noise through imperfect annotators or classifier raters, leaving the source of ambiguity implicit. We introduce CILN, a benchmark generation framework that creates IDN through controlled input corruptions. A diverse voter pool labels corrupted instances, producing benchmark datasets in which both the source and severity of ambiguity are explicit and controllable. Using CIFAR10, MNIST, and Adult, we construct 90 benchmark settings spanning multiple corruption families and severity levels. Our experiments show that the resulting benchmarks exhibit genuine instance-dependent noise, provide diverse confusion structures, and, on CIFAR-10, can produce label distributions that are closer to human uncertainty than an existing synthetic IDN benchmark. We further demonstrate that corruption-mediated IDN can expose failure modes of popular noisy-label learning methods, including Co-Teaching and DivideMix, that are not observed under comparable levels of rater-fallibility noise. These findings suggest that noise structure, not only noise rate, plays an important role in benchmark difficulty and algorithm behavior. By making ambiguity generation explicit and controllable, CILN provides a complementary benchmarking framework for studying noisy-label learning under diverse sources of instance difficulty.
Refurbishment-based noisy-label learning mixes an observed label with a model-derived pseudo target, typically using one sample-wise cleanliness score to control both branches. This creates a hidden coupling: reducing trust in the observed label automatically increases trust in the pseudo target. We show that this complementarity can replace one unreliable signal with another because a pseudo target learned from corrupted supervision may reproduce the noise it is meant to correct. Our representation diagnostics provide a consistent account of this mismatch: noisy supervision redirects deeper layers more strongly, whereas shallower relations remain comparatively stable and provide information beyond the loss posterior. We therefore propose TRACE, a Two-Source Reliability Assessment framework for Label Correction and Sample Reweighting. TRACE assesses the observed label using loss fit, shallow relation stability, and prediction agreement, while separately assessing the pseudo target using model confidence. Its source-specific scores control target correction and supervision strength without assuming complementary reliability. Across synthetic and real-world noisy benchmarks, TRACE improves representative refurbishment baselines and yields more reliable pseudo supervision.
Noisy labels remain a critical challenge for training deep neural networks, since memorizing incorrect labels degrades generalization. Once noisy samples are identified after training, the standard solution is to retrain the model from scratch on the cleaned dataset, which is increasingly expensive as datasets and models grow. Machine Unlearning (MU) has recently emerged as a computationally efficient alternative, but the relative effectiveness of different MU strategies for noisy-label correction remains poorly understood. In this work, we conduct a comparative empirical study of five MU methods (NegGrad, Fine-Tuning (FT), Random Labeling (RL), SalUn, and MUNBa) across symmetric, asymmetric, instance-dependent, and open-set noise on CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and the real-world noisy dataset Food-101N. Our central finding is that the appropriate unlearning strategy is conditioned on the noise structure. Simple FT is a strong baseline across most closed-set scenarios; RL and SalUn are the most consistently robust methods and, under instance-dependent noise, approach retraining accuracy at a fraction of the computational cost; MUNBa shows advantages mainly under extreme symmetric noise. Under open-set noise, in contrast, we show that retraining on the cleaned subset degrades accuracy relative to the noisy baseline, so approximating the retrained model is not an adequate objective in this regime. On Food-101N, all MU methods remain competitive and achieve accuracies close to retraining despite reducing runtime by an order of magnitude. These findings provide practical guidelines for selecting MU strategies for post-training noisy-label correction.
Label noise is common in medical imaging datasets due to factors such as inter-rater variability, annotation errors, and ambiguous cases. This can severely undermine the reliability and clinical effectiveness of machine learning models trained using those datasets. To address this challenge, we introduce Lightweight Noise Correction (LiNC), which adds a single trainable trust parameter per training sample and learns when to use the observed label and when to defer to the model during a standard training loop. The key idea is to train using a convex combination of the observed label and the model's own predictive distribution, controlled by a per-sample trust parameter. We show that the gradient of this objective drives trust values in opposite directions for clean versus noisy samples in the early training phase, yielding separable trust distributions. We use a 3-component Gaussian Mixture Model over the trust values to separate them into clean, ambiguous, and noisy cases and then execute a short soft-correction phase on the noisy cases and a final hard correction phase. Experiments on ten 2D datasets from MedMNISTv2 under label noise of up to 50% show consistent gains in accuracy and strong mislabel detection. LiNC adds negligible asymptotic overhead: the training-time complexity remains dominated by the base network, with additional memory growing linearly with the size of the training set.