Papers › Probabilistic Contrastive Learning for Long-Tailed Visual Recognition
Probabilistic Contrastive Learning for Long-Tailed Visual Recognition
Chaoqun Du, Yulin Wang, Shiji Song, Gao Huang
Long-tailed distributions frequently emerge in real-world data, where a large number of minority categories contain a limited number of samples. Such imbalance issue considerably impairs the performance of standard supervised learning algorithms, which are mainly designed for balanced training sets. Recent investigations have revealed that supervised contrastive learning exhibits promising potential in alleviating the data imbalance. However, the performance of supervised contrastive learning is plagued by an inherent challenge: it necessitates sufficiently large batches of training data to construct contrastive pairs that cover all categories, yet this requirement is difficult to meet in the context of class-imbalanced data. To overcome this obstacle, we propose a novel probabilistic contrastive (ProCo) learning algorithm that estimates the data distribution of the samples from each class in the feature space, and samples contrastive pairs accordingly. In fact, estimating the distributions of all classes using features in a small batch, particularly for imbalanced data, is not feasible. Our key idea is to introduce a reasonable and simple assumption that the normalized features in contrastive learning follow a mixture of von Mises-Fisher (vMF) distributions on unit space, which brings two-fold benefits. First, the distribution parameters can be estimated using only the first sample moment, which can be efficiently computed in an online manner across different batches. Second, based on the estimated distribution, the vMF distribution allows us to sample an infinite number of contrastive pairs and derive a closed form of the expected contrastive loss for efficient optimization. Our code is available at https://github.com/LeapLabTHU/ProCo.
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="2403.06726")
Code
Syntology Ran 6 of 9 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 3 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · our draft was wrong; 4 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 9 samples from 1 repository, 6 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; 6 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 3 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 leaplabthu/proco. “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.
c19231378e41dc5a · report
2a80220dabcb742a · report
600ff2c45e0de056 · report
9bb315ea09b14ff5 · report
3612da0362c505e5 · report
a4b471197204b414 · report
7be5050a9402a4c8 · report
7b4e3d0bd192b677 · report
e31c4b500a240e69 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-tail Learning | ImageNet-LT | ProCo (ResNet50) | Top-1 Accuracy | 60.2 | #14 of 69 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Long-tail Learning | ImageNet-LT | ProCo (ResNeXt50) | Top-1 Accuracy | 58.0 | #24 of 69 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Long-tail Learning | iNaturalist 2018 | ProCo (ResNet50) | Top-1 Accuracy | 75.8% | #10 of 43 | 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