
The training datasets used in long-tailed recognition are extremely unbalanced, resulting in significant variation in per-class accuracy across categories. Prior works mostly used average accuracy to evaluate their algorithms, which easily ignores those worst-performing categories. In this paper, we aim to enhance the accuracy of the worst-performing categories and utilize the harmonic mean and geometric mean to assess the model's performance. We revive the balanced undersampling idea to achieve this goal. In few-shot learning, balanced subsets are few-shot and will surely under-fit, hence it is not used in modern long-tailed learning. But, we find that it produces a more equitable distribution of accuracy across categories with much higher harmonic and geometric mean accuracy, and, but lower average accuracy. Moreover, we devise a straightforward model ensemble strategy, which does not result in any additional overhead and achieves improved harmonic and geometric mean while keeping the average accuracy almost intact when compared to state-of-the-art long-tailed learning methods. We validate the effectiveness of our approach on widely utilized benchmark datasets for long-tailed learning. Our code is at \href{https://github.com/yuhao318/BTM/}{https://github.com/yuhao318/BTM/}.
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV), Computer Science - Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV), Computer Science - Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 7 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
