Papers › Class-Wise Difficulty-Balanced Loss for Solving Class-Imbalance

Class-Wise Difficulty-Balanced Loss for Solving Class-Imbalance

5 Oct 2020arXiv:2010.01824archive 2025-07-28

Saptarshi Sinha, Hiroki Ohashi, Katsuyuki Nakamura

Class-imbalance is one of the major challenges in real world datasets, where a few classes (called majority classes) constitute much more data samples than the rest (called minority classes). Learning deep neural networks using such datasets leads to performances that are typically biased towards the majority classes. Most of the prior works try to solve class-imbalance by assigning more weights to the minority classes in various manners (e.g., data re-sampling, cost-sensitive learning). However, we argue that the number of available training data may not be always a good clue to determine the weighting strategy because some of the minority classes might be sufficiently represented even by a small number of training data. Overweighting samples of such classes can lead to drop in the model's overall performance. We claim that the 'difficulty' of a class as perceived by the model is more important to determine the weighting. In this light, we propose a novel loss function named Class-wise Difficulty-Balanced loss, or CDB loss, which dynamically distributes weights to each sample according to the difficulty of the class that the sample belongs to. Note that the assigned weights dynamically change as the 'difficulty' for the model may change with the learning progress. Extensive experiments are conducted on both image (artificially induced class-imbalanced MNIST, long-tailed CIFAR and ImageNet-LT) and video (EGTEA) datasets. The results show that CDB loss consistently outperforms the recently proposed loss functions on class-imbalanced datasets irrespective of the data type (i.e., video or image).

PaperPDFCodeCode Syntology ran

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2010.01824")

Code

Syntology Ran 0 of 2 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 2 have no recorded run.

By repository: official repository: 2 samples from 1 repository, 0 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

hitachi-rd-cv/CDB-loss officialmentioned on GitHubpytorch report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

2 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

2unverified

Licence: 2 of the 2 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from hitachi-rd-cv/CDB-loss. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

validate hitachi-rd-cv/CDB-loss/CIFAR-LT/cifar_train.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 9dffd656122a8b8a · report
validate hitachi-rd-cv/CDB-loss/EGTEA/EGTEA_train.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 48f9455a228a54a0 · report

Tasks

Long-tail Learning

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

TaskDatasetModelMetricValueRank at snapshotLeaderboardReport
Long-tail Learning CIFAR-100-LT (ρ=10) CDB-loss Error Rate 41.26 #29 of 31 Archive leaderboard report
Long-tail Learning CIFAR-100-LT (ρ=100) CDB-loss Error Rate 57.43 #59 of 66 Archive leaderboard report
Long-tail Learning EGTEA CDB-loss (3D- ResNeXt101) Average Precision 63.86 #1 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Long-tail Learning EGTEA CDB-loss (3D- ResNeXt101) Average Recall 66.24 #1 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Long-tail Learning ImageNet-LT CDB-loss (ResNet 10) Top-1 Accuracy 38.5 #65 of 69 Archive leaderboard report

Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections