ArticleJournal of imaging2024
Investigating Contrastive Pair Learning's Frontiers in Supervised, Semisupervised, and Self-Supervised Learning.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Benchmark-grounded self-supervised contrastive learning for AMI-based distribution grid monitoring.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Hybrid Quality-Based Recommender Systems: A Systematic Literature Review.Journal of imaging · 2025Review
- Deep learning in renal ultrasound: applications, challenges, and future outlook.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, contrastive learning has been a highly favored method for self-supervised representation learning, which significantly improves the unsupervised training of deep image models. Self-supervised learning is a subset of unsupervised learning in which the learning process is supervised by creating pseudolabels from the data themselves. Using supervised final adjustments after unsupervised pretraining is one way to take the most valuable information from a vast collection of unlabeled data and teach from a small number of labeled instances. This study aims firstly to compare contrastive learning with other traditional learning models; secondly to demonstrate by experimental studies the superiority of contrastive learning during classification; thirdly to fine-tune performance using pretrained models and appropriate hyperparameter selection; and finally to address the challenge of using contrastive learning techniques to produce data representations with semantic meaning that are independent of irrelevant factors like position, lighting, and background. Relying on contrastive techniques, the model efficiently captures meaningful representations by discerning similarities and differences between modified copies of the same image. The proposed strategy, involving unsupervised pretraining followed by supervised fine-tuning, improves the robustness, accuracy, and knowledge extraction of deep image models. The results show that even with a modest 5% of data labeled, the semisupervised model achieves an accuracy of 57.72%. However, the use of supervised learning with a contrastive approach and careful hyperparameter tuning increases accuracy to 85.43%. Further adjustment of the hyperparameters resulted in an excellent accuracy of 88.70%.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.