Unbiased Evaluation of Deep Metric Learning Algorithms
This work addresses the lack of fair benchmarks for researchers in deep metric learning, establishing new baselines for future studies.
The paper tackled the problem of unfair comparisons in deep metric learning (DML) by conducting an unbiased evaluation of 12 algorithms under equal conditions, finding that older methods perform better than previously believed and achieving state-of-the-art results on datasets like CUB200, CAR196, and Stanford Online Products.
Deep metric learning (DML) is a popular approach for images retrieval, solving verification (same or not) problems and addressing open set classification. Arguably, the most common DML approach is with triplet loss, despite significant advances in the area of DML. Triplet loss suffers from several issues such as collapse of the embeddings, high sensitivity to sampling schemes and more importantly a lack of performance when compared to more modern methods. We attribute this adoption to a lack of fair comparisons between various methods and the difficulty in adopting them for novel problem statements. In this paper, we perform an unbiased comparison of the most popular DML baseline methods under same conditions and more importantly, not obfuscating any hyper parameter tuning or adjustment needed to favor a particular method. We find, that under equal conditions several older methods perform significantly better than previously believed. In fact, our unified implementation of 12 recently introduced DML algorithms achieve state-of-the art performance on CUB200, CAR196, and Stanford Online products datasets which establishes a new set of baselines for future DML research. The codebase and all tuned hyperparameters will be open-sourced for reproducibility and to serve as a source of benchmark.