Papers › Re-Evaluating the Impact of Unseen-Class Unlabeled Data on Semi-Supervised Learning Model

Re-Evaluating the Impact of Unseen-Class Unlabeled Data on Semi-Supervised Learning Model

2 Mar 2025arXiv:2503.00884archive 2025-07-28

Rundong He, Yicong Dong, LanZhe Guo, Yilong Yin, Tailin Wu

Semi-supervised learning (SSL) effectively leverages unlabeled data and has been proven successful across various fields. Current safe SSL methods believe that unseen classes in unlabeled data harm the performance of SSL models. However, previous methods for assessing the impact of unseen classes on SSL model performance are flawed. They fix the size of the unlabeled dataset and adjust the proportion of unseen classes within the unlabeled data to assess the impact. This process contravenes the principle of controlling variables. Adjusting the proportion of unseen classes in unlabeled data alters the proportion of seen classes, meaning the decreased classification performance of seen classes may not be due to an increase in unseen class samples in the unlabeled data, but rather a decrease in seen class samples. Thus, the prior flawed assessment standard that ``unseen classes in unlabeled data can damage SSL model performance" may not always hold true. This paper strictly adheres to the principle of controlling variables, maintaining the proportion of seen classes in unlabeled data while only changing the unseen classes across five critical dimensions, to investigate their impact on SSL models from global robustness and local robustness. Experiments demonstrate that unseen classes in unlabeled data do not necessarily impair the performance of SSL models; in fact, under certain conditions, unseen classes may even enhance them.

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

5 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 5 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 5 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 rundonghe/RESSL. “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.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

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