Papers › Contrastive Tuning: A Little Help to Make Masked Autoencoders Forget
Contrastive Tuning: A Little Help to Make Masked Autoencoders Forget
Johannes Lehner, Benedikt Alkin, Andreas Fürst, Elisabeth Rumetshofer, Lukas Miklautz, Sepp Hochreiter
Masked Image Modeling (MIM) methods, like Masked Autoencoders (MAE), efficiently learn a rich representation of the input. However, for adapting to downstream tasks, they require a sufficient amount of labeled data since their rich features code not only objects but also less relevant image background. In contrast, Instance Discrimination (ID) methods focus on objects. In this work, we study how to combine the efficiency and scalability of MIM with the ability of ID to perform downstream classification in the absence of large amounts of labeled data. To this end, we introduce Masked Autoencoder Contrastive Tuning (MAE-CT), a sequential approach that utilizes the implicit clustering of the Nearest Neighbor Contrastive Learning (NNCLR) objective to induce abstraction in the topmost layers of a pre-trained MAE. MAE-CT tunes the rich features such that they form semantic clusters of objects without using any labels. Notably, MAE-CT does not rely on hand-crafted augmentations and frequently achieves its best performances while using only minimal augmentations (crop & flip). Further, MAE-CT is compute efficient as it requires at most 10% overhead compared to MAE re-training. Applied to large and huge Vision Transformer (ViT) models, MAE-CT excels over previous self-supervised methods trained on ImageNet in linear probing, k-NN and low-shot classification accuracy as well as in unsupervised clustering accuracy. With ViT-H/16 MAE-CT achieves a new state-of-the-art in linear probing of 82.2%.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
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
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Image Clustering | ImageNet | MAE-CT (ViT-H/16 best) | Accuracy | 58.0 | #6 of 12 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | ImageNet | MAE-CT (ViT-H/16 best) | NMI | 81.8 | #6 of 12 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | ImageNet | MAE-CT (ViT-H/16 mean) | Accuracy | 57.1 | #8 of 12 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | ImageNet | MAE-CT (ViT-H/16 mean) | NMI | 81.7 | #8 of 12 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | Imagenet-dog-15 | MAE-CT (best) | ARI | 0.879 | #1 of 20 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | Imagenet-dog-15 | MAE-CT (best) | Accuracy | 0.943 | #1 of 20 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | Imagenet-dog-15 | MAE-CT (best) | Backbone | ViT-H/16 | #1 of 20 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | Imagenet-dog-15 | MAE-CT (best) | Image Size | 224 | #1 of 20 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | Imagenet-dog-15 | MAE-CT (best) | NMI | 0.904 | #1 of 20 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | Imagenet-dog-15 | MAE-CT (mean) | ARI | 0.821 | #2 of 20 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | Imagenet-dog-15 | MAE-CT (mean) | Accuracy | 0.874 | #2 of 20 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | Imagenet-dog-15 | MAE-CT (mean) | Backbone | ViT-H/16 | #2 of 20 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | Imagenet-dog-15 | MAE-CT (mean) | Image Size | 224 | #2 of 20 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Clustering | Imagenet-dog-15 | MAE-CT (mean) | NMI | 0.882 | #2 of 20 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Self-Supervised Image Classification | ImageNet | MAE-CT (ViT-H/16) | Number of Params | 632M | #12 of 144 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Self-Supervised Image Classification | ImageNet | MAE-CT (ViT-H/16) | Top 1 Accuracy | 82.2% | #12 of 144 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Self-Supervised Image Classification | ImageNet | MAE-CT (ViT-L/16 | Number of Params | 307M | #14 of 144 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Self-Supervised Image Classification | ImageNet | MAE-CT (ViT-L/16 | Top 1 Accuracy | 81.5% | #14 of 144 | 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.
Methods
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