Papers › Label-Retrieval-Augmented Diffusion Models for Learning from Noisy Labels
Label-Retrieval-Augmented Diffusion Models for Learning from Noisy Labels
Jian Chen, Ruiyi Zhang, Tong Yu, Rohan Sharma, Zhiqiang Xu, Tong Sun, Changyou Chen
Learning from noisy labels is an important and long-standing problem in machine learning for real applications. One of the main research lines focuses on learning a label corrector to purify potential noisy labels. However, these methods typically rely on strict assumptions and are limited to certain types of label noise. In this paper, we reformulate the label-noise problem from a generative-model perspective, i.e., labels are generated by gradually refining an initial random guess. This new perspective immediately enables existing powerful diffusion models to seamlessly learn the stochastic generative process. Once the generative uncertainty is modeled, we can perform classification inference using maximum likelihood estimation of labels. To mitigate the impact of noisy labels, we propose the Label-Retrieval-Augmented (LRA) diffusion model, which leverages neighbor consistency to effectively construct pseudo-clean labels for diffusion training. Our model is flexible and general, allowing easy incorporation of different types of conditional information, e.g., use of pre-trained models, to further boost model performance. Extensive experiments are conducted for evaluation. Our model achieves new state-of-the-art (SOTA) results on all the standard real-world benchmark datasets. Remarkably, by incorporating conditional information from the powerful CLIP model, our method can boost the current SOTA accuracy by 10-20 absolute points in many cases.
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="2305.19518")
Code
Syntology Ran 7 of 9 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 2 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 3 ran · our draft was wrong; 4 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 9 samples from 1 repository, 7 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
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
9 samples harvested; 7 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.
Licence: 0 of the 9 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 puar-playground/lra-diffusion. “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.
a89b8862957e5753 · report
44772e75d843b9de · report
587c31bba00d49a3 · report
75eae7792fcbf493 · report
f46dae1e37fe3580 · report
501f4b5cb5ea803a · report
6f8aedc90a1411e5 · report
2d12f1aeca8d130b · report
1c95f06ac63ad9f3 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Image Classification | Clothing1M | LRA-diffusion (CC) | Accuracy | 75.7% | #1 of 51 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Classification | Food-101N | LRA-diffusion (CLIP ViT) | Accuracy | 93.42 | #1 of 4 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Classification | mini WebVision 1.0 | LRA-diffusion (CLIP ViT) | ImageNet Top-1 Accuracy | 82.56 | #1 of 47 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Classification | mini WebVision 1.0 | LRA-diffusion (CLIP ViT) | Top-1 Accuracy | 84.16 | #1 of 47 | 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