Papers › Drawing Multiple Augmentation Samples Per Image During Training Efficiently Decreases...
Drawing Multiple Augmentation Samples Per Image During Training Efficiently Decreases Test Error
Stanislav Fort, Andrew Brock, Razvan Pascanu, Soham De, Samuel L. Smith
In computer vision, it is standard practice to draw a single sample from the data augmentation procedure for each unique image in the mini-batch. However recent work has suggested drawing multiple samples can achieve higher test accuracies. In this work, we provide a detailed empirical evaluation of how the number of augmentation samples per unique image influences model performance on held out data when training deep ResNets. We demonstrate drawing multiple samples per image consistently enhances the test accuracy achieved for both small and large batch training. Crucially, this benefit arises even if different numbers of augmentations per image perform the same number of parameter updates and gradient evaluations (requiring the same total compute). Although prior work has found variance in the gradient estimate arising from subsampling the dataset has an implicit regularization benefit, our experiments suggest variance which arises from the data augmentation process harms generalization. We apply these insights to the highly performant NFNet-F5, achieving 86.8% top-1 w/o extra data on ImageNet.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
No code repository is listed for this paper in the archive or in Syntology's graph.
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 Classification | ImageNet | NFNet-F5 w/ SAM w/ augmult=16 | Number of params | 377.2M | #124 of 1060 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Classification | ImageNet | NFNet-F5 w/ SAM w/ augmult=16 | Top 1 Accuracy | 86.78% | #124 of 1060 | 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