Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates the interplay between scoring and pacing in curriculum learning, utilizing two evaluation protocols to isolate their effects on model performance. By implementing a confusion-aware difficulty score within the Transfer Teacher framework, the authors demonstrate that this scoring method yields interpretable difficulty rankings that align with human intuition, yet reveals that neither curriculum nor anti-curriculum ordering enhances accuracy over standard training with full data. Notably, confusion-aware curriculum ordering significantly improves data efficiency, outperforming random ordering by up to 8.7% in a limited data scenario, highlighting its potential as a more effective training strategy.
Confusion-aware curriculum ordering can boost data efficiency by up to 8.7% compared to random ordering, challenging traditional assumptions about curriculum learning effectiveness.
Curriculum learning couples two design choices, how samples are scored by difficulty and how harder samples are paced into training, making it difficult to attribute observed gains to either component. We disentangle these factors with two evaluation protocols: stage-wise test subsets that validate scoring functions independently of curriculum training, and a baseline that applies the same pacing schedule to randomly ordered data. Within the Transfer Teacher framework (TTF), we use these protocols to evaluate a confusion-aware difficulty score that considers both correct-class confidence and the probability distribution over incorrect classes. On CIFAR-10 with ResNet-18 and VGG-16, the proposed score produces model-interpretable difficulty rankings that align with human intuition. However, at full data, neither curriculum nor anti-curriculum ordering improves accuracy over standard training, indicating that improving the scoring function alone is insufficient to overcome the known failure modes of curriculum learning in TTF. In contrast, We find that confusion-aware curriculum ordering result in consistent data-efficiency benefits, outperforming random ordering by up to 8.7% points at the 20% data regime, suggesting the potential of TTF as a data-efficient training method.
