Papers › RandAugment: Practical automated data augmentation with a reduced search space
RandAugment: Practical automated data augmentation with a reduced search space
Ekin D. Cubuk, Barret Zoph, Jonathon Shlens, Quoc V. Le
Recent work has shown that data augmentation has the potential to significantly improve the generalization of deep learning models. Recently, automated augmentation strategies have led to state-of-the-art results in image classification and object detection. While these strategies were optimized for improving validation accuracy, they also led to state-of-the-art results in semi-supervised learning and improved robustness to common corruptions of images. An obstacle to a large-scale adoption of these methods is a separate search phase which increases the training complexity and may substantially increase the computational cost. Additionally, due to the separate search phase, these approaches are unable to adjust the regularization strength based on model or dataset size. Automated augmentation policies are often found by training small models on small datasets and subsequently applied to train larger models. In this work, we remove both of these obstacles. RandAugment has a significantly reduced search space which allows it to be trained on the target task with no need for a separate proxy task. Furthermore, due to the parameterization, the regularization strength may be tailored to different model and dataset sizes. RandAugment can be used uniformly across different tasks and datasets and works out of the box, matching or surpassing all previous automated augmentation approaches on CIFAR-10/100, SVHN, and ImageNet. On the ImageNet dataset we achieve 85.0% accuracy, a 0.6% increase over the previous state-of-the-art and 1.0% increase over baseline augmentation. On object detection, RandAugment leads to 1.0-1.3% improvement over baseline augmentation, and is within 0.3% mAP of AutoAugment on COCO. Finally, due to its interpretable hyperparameter, RandAugment may be used to investigate the role of data augmentation with varying model and dataset size. Code is available online.
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="1909.13719")
Code
Syntology Ran 58 of 65 code samples harvested from 6 repositories linked to this paper; 7 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · violated contract; 17 ran · our draft was wrong; 22 ran · fixture could not drive it; 18 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: community (archive-listed): 64 samples from 6 repositories, 57 ran; 1 identical to code first harvested elsewhere. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
19 repositories listed; official and paper-mentioned ones first.
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
65 samples harvested; 58 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 7 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: 17 of the 65 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 6 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. Some samples are identical code Syntology first harvested from another repository; for those, this paper's copy is not located and its licence is not recorded. “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.
4a0ac9d611e018bc · report
35f5a6d3913e6b0e · report
03ecbd868107e6f7 · report
4befb1744e90f3a1 · report
08f47bae89750cac · report
f5f0bf976dfcf068 · report
19b3cb2d9f27fcdb · report
eb475b4fcf7d8891 · report
e097e00c2974ac62 · report
cd8cce1f7b2b9e61 · report
b22d322fc26595bc · report
e1ccc58bf76a30b9 · report
815f704e5efd8345 · report
f5e3179cafd9393a · report
70eab251c4b2bce2 · report
e74342905c295c87 · report
c28a72552d33774e · report
6479c2b0e4d54d6a · report
ce08e08f28dfcee7 · report
b2893a9a2ac1188f · report
f03d112eee854337 · report
d6e5e2e212d3e912 · report
e3a2ec04026a49e8 · report
e02e6b30e0c6b0ab · report
52872165441774c7 · report
b6eb3433772b9aac · report
fa05edca4ee502d1 · report
0e2bfdf3982286ac · report
5ea03e170ec307dd · report
033f4c7eebc4b8bc · report
c853710460b412e7 · report
32a7da0ae8a21668 · report
5f1efa6a7f09bf92 · report
747a0d64c7ffa9e5 · report
74223e0d5db8f6dc · report
6d3fa2f36220efed · report
a07328daac80e5d4 · report
6f465d3353435748 · report
51eba7748cab33ee · report
b794fd0b35eea322 · report
a14dd4fa2af8e72e · report
ac724bc0e98f3cda · report
c2b9e317cc24e2a5 · report
6d903cf9b58e8ce3 · report
8d1db612602ab793 · report
cbbf595da3dbb1fd · report
3f5e624979a30a88 · report
7fad25ebc151a21a · report
eb627b1078fe24a3 · report
472154b113f3c670 · report
9cc62c9a79622659 · report
b8a2aca46dc33d3f · report
f5999a1ee8824e22 · report
9c2425c71cab36a2 · report
bd8449369ce2815d · report
845982ca54304048 · report
2c8f458ee8d12c14 · report
ad7a01616e026f1c · report
1c3be67e92763d85 · report
89a74c24e1285658 · report
93e2ff77da69661e · report
4b57170196836cae · report
3931a647e47e6c9e · report
50c88035541deccb · report
3e773c6c5bc796d4 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Data Augmentation | ImageNet | ResNet-50 (RA) | Accuracy (%) | 77.6 | #14 of 17 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | EfficientNet-B7 (randaug) | Accuracy - All Images | 45 | #17 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | EfficientNet-B7 (randaug) | Accuracy - Clean Images | 48.7 | #17 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | EfficientNet-B7 (randaug) | Accuracy - Corrupted Images | 38.9 | #17 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | EfficientNet-B5 (randaug) | Accuracy - All Images | 42.1 | #25 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | EfficientNet-B5 (randaug) | Accuracy - Clean Images | 47.3 | #25 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Domain Generalization | VizWiz-Classification | EfficientNet-B5 (randaug) | Accuracy - Corrupted Images | 35.5 | #25 of 90 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Classification | ImageNet | EfficientNet-B8 (RandAugment) | Top 1 Accuracy | 85.4% | #227 of 1060 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Classification | ImageNet | EfficientNet-B7 (RandAugment) | Number of params | 66M | #269 of 1060 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Image Classification | ImageNet | EfficientNet-B7 (RandAugment) | Top 1 Accuracy | 85% | #269 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.
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