Deep Learning Label Correction for Noisy Training Data

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing deep learning models are prone to performance deterioration due to the use of noisy labels, especially in high-cost labeling scenarios like medical systems and manufacturing lines, where wrong labels are inevitable, necessitating a robust model against such errors.

Innovation Solution

A machine learning apparatus with a label correction unit that iteratively updates initial labels based on model outputs, a learning rate estimation unit to determine an optimal learning rate, and a label-noise-resistant training unit to ensure reliable target labels, using a balance between suppressing overfitting and improving accuracy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If supervised learning with manually added target labels is used to improve model reliability, then model performance is improved, but wrong labels are inevitably contained causing significant deterioration in model performance

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemodel reliabilityVSAvoidlabel accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables the model to self-correct labels by using its own predictions to identify and correct wrong labels in the training data. The model iteratively improves its own training data quality without requiring external expert intervention for each label correction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements a feedback mechanism where the model's predictions are fed back into the training process to identify and correct wrong labels. The correction unit uses the model outputs to determine which labels are incorrect and updates them accordingly, creating a closed-loop system that continuously improves data quality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Manufacturing precision

If the number of label updates is increased to improve label accuracy, then more wrong labels are corrected, but training time and computational cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvelabel accuracyVSAvoidtraining time
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs partial updates by selectively correcting only the labels that are identified as wrong based on model predictions, rather than updating all labels. This approach corrects sufficient labels to achieve high accuracy without the computational cost of exhaustive updates.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary identification of wrong labels using model predictions before conducting the actual label correction. This preliminary action allows the system to target only the necessary labels for correction, avoiding unnecessary computational work on already correct labels.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Productivity

If a high learning rate is used to speed up training convergence, then training speed is improved, but the model may overfit to wrong labels

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetraining speedVSAvoidmodel robustness
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts the learning rate based on the correction status of labels. The learning rate is set to be higher when wrong labels are present to accelerate convergence, and adjusted as corrections are made, allowing the model to adapt its training behavior to the current data quality state.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the learning rate parameter in response to label correction progress. By modifying this critical training parameter based on the identified wrong labels and correction status, the system optimizes both training speed and robustness throughout the training process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS20260080252A1Machine learning apparatus, method, and storage medium
Publication Date: 2026.03.19 KK TOSHIBA
  • US20260080252A1 patent drawing
  • US20260080252A1 patent drawing
  • US20260080252A1 patent drawing

AI summary

According to one embodiment, a machine learning apparatus comprising a processor. The processor acquires, by applying a first sample to a first deep learning model that processes a classification problem, a first model output containing an inference probability and/or a feature vector output. The processor determines whether an update of a label to be used as a teacher in learning of the first deep learning model is required, based on the first model output and/or the label. The processor updates the label based on the first model output and a label at a current number of updates if it is determined that the update of the label is required, and terminates the update of the label if it is determined that the update of the label is not required.