Papers › On Mixup Training: Improved Calibration and Predictive Uncertainty for Deep Neural Networks
On Mixup Training: Improved Calibration and Predictive Uncertainty for Deep Neural Networks
Sunil Thulasidasan, Gopinath Chennupati, Jeff Bilmes, Tanmoy Bhattacharya, Sarah Michalak
Mixup~\cite{zhang2017mixup} is a recently proposed method for training deep neural networks where additional samples are generated during training by convexly combining random pairs of images and their associated labels. While simple to implement, it has been shown to be a surprisingly effective method of data augmentation for image classification: DNNs trained with mixup show noticeable gains in classification performance on a number of image classification benchmarks. In this work, we discuss a hitherto untouched aspect of mixup training -- the calibration and predictive uncertainty of models trained with mixup. We find that DNNs trained with mixup are significantly better calibrated -- i.e., the predicted softmax scores are much better indicators of the actual likelihood of a correct prediction -- than DNNs trained in the regular fashion. We conduct experiments on a number of image classification architectures and datasets -- including large-scale datasets like ImageNet -- and find this to be the case. Additionally, we find that merely mixing features does not result in the same calibration benefit and that the label smoothing in mixup training plays a significant role in improving calibration. Finally, we also observe that mixup-trained DNNs are less prone to over-confident predictions on out-of-distribution and random-noise data. We conclude that the typical overconfidence seen in neural networks, even on in-distribution data is likely a consequence of training with hard labels, suggesting that mixup be employed for classification tasks where predictive uncertainty is a significant concern.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | STL-10 | Mixup (Gaussian) | Percentage correct | 95.93 | #1 of 6 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | STL-10 | Mixup (Imagenet) | Percentage correct | 83.28 | #2 of 6 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | STL-10 | Baseline (Imagenet) | Percentage correct | 80.57 | #3 of 6 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | STL-10 | Dropout(Imagenet) | Percentage correct | 78.93 | #4 of 6 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | STL-10 | Baseline (Gaussian) | Percentage correct | 73.28 | #5 of 6 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Out-of-Distribution Detection | STL-10 | Dropout(Gaussian) | Percentage correct | 70.57 | #6 of 6 | 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