Self-Supervised Learning Based Handwriting Verification

Mihir Chauhan, Mohammad Abuzar Shaikh, Bina Ramamurthy, Mingchen Gao, Siwei Lyu, Sargur Srihari·May 28, 2024

Summary

The paper presents SSL-HV, a self-supervised learning method for handwriting verification that compares generative (VAE) and contrastive (VICReg) approaches with traditional methods on the CEDAR AND dataset. VAE and VICReg outperform their counterparts, with VAE achieving 76.3% accuracy and VICReg reaching 78%. Pre-trained SSL models improve writer verification accuracy by 6.7% and 9% compared to a supervised ResNet-18 baseline, highlighting the potential of self-supervised learning for scalability in handwriting tasks. The study also explores various SSL techniques, data augmentation, and the limitations of supervised methods due to the need for labeled data. The findings suggest that self-supervised learning can enhance feature extraction and performance in the absence of extensive labeled data.

Key findings

6

Paper digest

What problem does the paper attempt to solve? Is this a new problem?

The paper focuses on addressing the issue of posterior collapse in Variational AutoEncoders (VAEs) by proposing various approaches such as KL annealing and different VAE models like VQ-VAE . Posterior collapse occurs when the latent representation becomes independent of the input data, hindering the decoder's ability to utilize information from the latent space . While the problem of posterior collapse in VAEs is not new, the paper explores recent advancements and strategies to mitigate this issue, such as VQ-VAE, within the VAE family of models .


What scientific hypothesis does this paper seek to validate?

The scientific hypothesis that this paper aims to validate is related to the performance of various self-supervised learning approaches for handwriting verification. The study compares different self-supervised learning methods, such as MoCo, SimClr, BYOL, SimSiam, FastSiam, DINO, BarlowTwins, and VicReg, against handcrafted feature baselines on the CEDAR AND Dataset with 10% train writers. The hypothesis focuses on evaluating the effectiveness of these self-supervised learning techniques in achieving higher test accuracy by analyzing the separation between writers (Intra distance - Inter distance) and their impact on accuracy with a small training dataset .


What new ideas, methods, or models does the paper propose? What are the characteristics and advantages compared to previous methods?

The paper on Self-Supervised Learning Based Handwriting Verification proposes several innovative ideas, methods, and models in the context of handwriting verification using self-supervised learning techniques :

  • Contrastive Self-Supervised Learning for Handwriting Verification: The paper introduces a contrastive self-supervised approach for handwriting verification, leveraging both coarse-grained and fine-grained features extracted from unlabeled handwritten datasets. This approach aims to capture high-level characteristics like overall shape, slantness, and spatial layout, as well as detailed features such as stroke thickness and character variations .

  • Generative Models and Feature Extraction: The study evaluates various generative self-supervised feature extraction methods, including AutoRegressive, Flow-Based, AutoEncoding, and GANs within the Generative Self-Supervised Learning for Handwriting Verification (GSSL-HV) framework. Notably, the Variational Autoencoder (VAE) outperformed other generative approaches, showing a relative gain in accuracy, while VICReg demonstrated superior performance over both generative and contrastive methods .

  • Model Architectures: The paper discusses the use of models like PixelRNN, PixelCNN, and Gated PixelCNN for autoregressive generative modeling, which predict raw pixel values using masked convolutions and multinomial loss functions. It also explores improvements in models like PixelCNN++ and PixelSNAIL, enhancing the efficiency and performance of Gated PixelCNN .

  • Training Objectives: The research explores the application of auto-regressive objectives like PixelCNN objective and BERT objective using transformer architecture for self-supervised learning tasks. These objectives have shown success in training Large Language Models like GPT2, enhancing generalization and downstream task performance with limited labels .

  • Future Research Directions: The paper suggests future research directions to enhance feature extraction capabilities by utilizing multiple unlabeled handwritten datasets such as the IAM handwriting dataset. It also emphasizes the importance of comparing similar and different handwritten content using advanced self-supervised approaches to further improve handwriting verification tasks . The paper on Self-Supervised Learning Based Handwriting Verification introduces innovative characteristics and advantages compared to previous methods in the field of handwriting verification using self-supervised learning techniques. Here are the key points based on the details in the paper:

  • Contrastive Self-Supervised Approach: The paper proposes a contrastive self-supervised approach for handwriting verification, aiming to extract both coarse-grained and fine-grained features from unlabeled handwritten datasets. This method captures high-level characteristics like overall shape, slantness, and spatial layout, as well as detailed features such as stroke thickness and character variations .

  • Generative Models Evaluation: The study evaluates various generative self-supervised feature extraction methods, highlighting the effectiveness of the Variational Autoencoder (VAE) over other generative approaches. VAE achieved a relative gain in accuracy, while VICReg outperformed both generative and contrastive methods, showing a relative accuracy gain of 9% over the baselines .

  • Model Architectures: The paper discusses the use of models like PixelRNN, PixelCNN, and Gated PixelCNN for autoregressive generative modeling, with improvements seen in models like PixelCNN++ and PixelSNAIL. These architectures enhance efficiency and performance in capturing handwriting details .

  • Training Objectives: The research explores the application of auto-regressive objectives like PixelCNN and BERT objectives using transformer architecture for self-supervised learning tasks. These objectives have shown success in training Large Language Models, enhancing generalization and downstream task performance with limited labels .

  • Future Research Directions: The paper suggests future research directions to enhance feature extraction capabilities by utilizing multiple unlabeled handwritten datasets and comparing similar and different handwritten content using advanced self-supervised approaches. This approach aims to further improve handwriting verification tasks .

These characteristics and advancements in self-supervised learning for handwriting verification offer promising avenues for improving feature extraction, model performance, and downstream task accuracy in the domain of handwriting verification tasks.


Do any related researches exist? Who are the noteworthy researchers on this topic in this field?What is the key to the solution mentioned in the paper?

Several related research studies exist in the field of self-supervised learning based handwriting verification. Noteworthy researchers in this area include Mahmoud Assran, Randall Balestriero, Quentin Duval, Florian Bordes, Ishan Misra, Piotr Bojanowski, Pascal Vincent, Michael Rabbat, Nicolas Ballas, Eikan Wang, Xiaodong Wang, William Wen, Shunting Zhang, Xu Zhao, Keren Zhou, Richard Zou, Ajit Mathews, Gregory Chanan, Peng Wu, Soumith Chintala, and many others .

The key to the solution mentioned in the paper involves utilizing self-supervised learning to generate robust handwritten features, which can enhance the downstream task of handwriting verification even with limited training labels. The paper evaluates various approaches such as AutoRegressive, Flow Based, AutoEncoding, GANs, and compares the performance of different self-supervised learning frameworks. Notably, the Variational Autoencoder (VAE) outperformed other generative self-supervised feature extraction methods, achieving a significant relative gain in accuracy. Additionally, the Vicreg approach demonstrated superior performance over both generative and contrastive methods, showcasing a substantial accuracy improvement over the baselines .


How were the experiments in the paper designed?

The experiments in the paper were designed with a focus on self-supervised learning for handwriting verification. Various methods and architectures were explored to enhance the verification process:

  • The experiments involved pre-training and fine-tuning processes using different self-supervised learning techniques such as BYOL, VicReg, BarlowTwins, FastSiam, SimSiam, and DINO .
  • Different feature extractors like GSC, HOGS, ResNet-18, and Vision Transformer (ViT) were utilized for the experiments .
  • The experiments included the use of various augmentation techniques, network architectures, and training setups to evaluate the performance of the models .
  • The experiments focused on generating both coarse-grained and fine-grained features to capture high-level and detailed characteristics of the handwriting styles .
  • The experiments also involved downstream tasks with different levels of granularity to assess the applicability of the contrastive self-supervised approach in handwriting verification .
  • The paper detailed the implementation details, model architectures, training configurations, and evaluation metrics used in the experiments to validate the effectiveness of the self-supervised learning methods for handwriting verification .

What is the dataset used for quantitative evaluation? Is the code open source?

The dataset used for quantitative evaluation in the study is the CEDAR AND dataset . The code for the project is open source and available on GitHub at the following link: https://github.com/lightly-ai/lightly .


Do the experiments and results in the paper provide good support for the scientific hypotheses that need to be verified? Please analyze.

The experiments and results presented in the paper provide substantial support for the scientific hypotheses that need to be verified. The paper extensively evaluates data augmentation techniques for handwriting verification in the context of contrastive self-supervised pre-training . It discusses the importance of maintaining consistency and natural variability in handwritten styles to enhance generalization within specific domains . Additionally, the paper explores the effectiveness of self-supervised contrastive methods for handwriting verification, showcasing the benefits of both coarse-grained and fine-grained features in extracting high-level characteristics and details from handwritten samples .

Moreover, the paper delves into the downstream task granularity of self-supervised contrastive methods, highlighting their better applicability with coarse-grained tasks involving higher-level attributes compared to fine-grained tasks . It emphasizes the significance of both coarse-grained and fine-grained features in extracting high-level characteristics and detailed aspects of handwriting styles, which aligns with the scientific hypotheses related to the contrastive self-supervised approach for handwriting verification .

Overall, the experiments and results presented in the paper offer strong empirical evidence supporting the scientific hypotheses related to the effectiveness of contrastive self-supervised learning for handwriting verification, showcasing the importance of feature extraction at different levels of granularity to capture both high-level and detailed characteristics of handwritten samples .


What are the contributions of this paper?

The contributions of the paper include:

  • Introducing a new approach to self-supervised learning
  • Exploring training self-supervised vision transformers empirically
  • Proposing Vicregl for self-supervised learning of local visual features
  • Discussing the use of contrastive visual representation learning for visual models
  • Improving flow-based generative models with variational dequantization and architecture design
  • Introducing Vicreg: Variance-invariance-covariance regularization for self-supervised learning

What work can be continued in depth?

Future research in the field of self-supervised learning for handwriting verification can focus on enhancing feature extraction capabilities using multiple unlabeled handwritten datasets such as the IAM handwriting dataset. Additionally, comparing similar and different handwritten content using state-of-the-art self-supervised approaches could be explored to further improve the downstream task of handwriting verification .


Introduction
Background
Overview of handwriting verification and its importance
Traditional methods and their limitations
Objective
To evaluate SSL-HV (Self-Supervised Learning for Handwriting Verification)
Compare generative (VAE) and contrastive (VICReg) approaches
Assess the impact on writer verification accuracy
Method
Data Collection
CEDAR AND dataset description
Dataset characteristics and preprocessing
Data Preprocessing
Techniques used for data augmentation
Handling imbalanced data, if applicable
Generative Approach: Variational Autoencoder (VAE)
VAE Implementation
Architecture and training process
Performance metrics: accuracy and comparison with traditional methods
Results and Analysis: VAE
Accuracy of 76.3% and its significance
Contrastive Approach: VICReg
VICReg Methodology
Core principles and differences from VAE
Training and evaluation
Results and Analysis: VICReg
Accuracy of 78% and comparative analysis
Pre-Training and Transfer Learning
SSL Models: Self-Supervised Learning
Pre-trained SSL models (e.g., MoCo, SimCLR) applied to handwriting verification
Accuracy improvement over supervised ResNet-18 baseline
Scalability and Performance Boost
Comparison of SSL vs. supervised methods in terms of scalability
Limitations and Discussion
Supervised Learning Drawbacks
Dependency on labeled data
Challenges with data annotation for handwriting tasks
Exploring SSL Techniques
Future directions for enhancing self-supervised learning in handwriting verification
Conclusion
Summary of findings
Implications for handwriting verification in real-world scenarios
Potential for self-supervised learning to overcome data limitations
Basic info
papers
computer vision and pattern recognition
computation and language
artificial intelligence
Advanced features
Insights
Which approach does VAE outperform in the study, generative or contrastive?
How much accuracy improvement does pre-trained SSL models provide compared to a supervised ResNet-18 baseline?
What is the accuracy achieved by VICReg on the CEDAR AND dataset?
What method does SSL-HV employ for handwriting verification?

Self-Supervised Learning Based Handwriting Verification

Mihir Chauhan, Mohammad Abuzar Shaikh, Bina Ramamurthy, Mingchen Gao, Siwei Lyu, Sargur Srihari·May 28, 2024

Summary

The paper presents SSL-HV, a self-supervised learning method for handwriting verification that compares generative (VAE) and contrastive (VICReg) approaches with traditional methods on the CEDAR AND dataset. VAE and VICReg outperform their counterparts, with VAE achieving 76.3% accuracy and VICReg reaching 78%. Pre-trained SSL models improve writer verification accuracy by 6.7% and 9% compared to a supervised ResNet-18 baseline, highlighting the potential of self-supervised learning for scalability in handwriting tasks. The study also explores various SSL techniques, data augmentation, and the limitations of supervised methods due to the need for labeled data. The findings suggest that self-supervised learning can enhance feature extraction and performance in the absence of extensive labeled data.
Mind map
Accuracy improvement over supervised ResNet-18 baseline
Pre-trained SSL models (e.g., MoCo, SimCLR) applied to handwriting verification
Future directions for enhancing self-supervised learning in handwriting verification
Challenges with data annotation for handwriting tasks
Dependency on labeled data
Comparison of SSL vs. supervised methods in terms of scalability
SSL Models: Self-Supervised Learning
Accuracy of 78% and comparative analysis
Training and evaluation
Core principles and differences from VAE
Contrastive Approach: VICReg
Performance metrics: accuracy and comparison with traditional methods
Architecture and training process
Generative Approach: Variational Autoencoder (VAE)
Dataset characteristics and preprocessing
CEDAR AND dataset description
Assess the impact on writer verification accuracy
Compare generative (VAE) and contrastive (VICReg) approaches
To evaluate SSL-HV (Self-Supervised Learning for Handwriting Verification)
Traditional methods and their limitations
Overview of handwriting verification and its importance
Potential for self-supervised learning to overcome data limitations
Implications for handwriting verification in real-world scenarios
Summary of findings
Exploring SSL Techniques
Supervised Learning Drawbacks
Scalability and Performance Boost
Pre-Training and Transfer Learning
Results and Analysis: VICReg
VICReg Methodology
Results and Analysis: VAE
VAE Implementation
Data Preprocessing
Data Collection
Objective
Background
Conclusion
Limitations and Discussion
Method
Introduction
Outline
Introduction
Background
Overview of handwriting verification and its importance
Traditional methods and their limitations
Objective
To evaluate SSL-HV (Self-Supervised Learning for Handwriting Verification)
Compare generative (VAE) and contrastive (VICReg) approaches
Assess the impact on writer verification accuracy
Method
Data Collection
CEDAR AND dataset description
Dataset characteristics and preprocessing
Data Preprocessing
Techniques used for data augmentation
Handling imbalanced data, if applicable
Generative Approach: Variational Autoencoder (VAE)
VAE Implementation
Architecture and training process
Performance metrics: accuracy and comparison with traditional methods
Results and Analysis: VAE
Accuracy of 76.3% and its significance
Contrastive Approach: VICReg
VICReg Methodology
Core principles and differences from VAE
Training and evaluation
Results and Analysis: VICReg
Accuracy of 78% and comparative analysis
Pre-Training and Transfer Learning
SSL Models: Self-Supervised Learning
Pre-trained SSL models (e.g., MoCo, SimCLR) applied to handwriting verification
Accuracy improvement over supervised ResNet-18 baseline
Scalability and Performance Boost
Comparison of SSL vs. supervised methods in terms of scalability
Limitations and Discussion
Supervised Learning Drawbacks
Dependency on labeled data
Challenges with data annotation for handwriting tasks
Exploring SSL Techniques
Future directions for enhancing self-supervised learning in handwriting verification
Conclusion
Summary of findings
Implications for handwriting verification in real-world scenarios
Potential for self-supervised learning to overcome data limitations
Key findings
6

Paper digest

What problem does the paper attempt to solve? Is this a new problem?

The paper focuses on addressing the issue of posterior collapse in Variational AutoEncoders (VAEs) by proposing various approaches such as KL annealing and different VAE models like VQ-VAE . Posterior collapse occurs when the latent representation becomes independent of the input data, hindering the decoder's ability to utilize information from the latent space . While the problem of posterior collapse in VAEs is not new, the paper explores recent advancements and strategies to mitigate this issue, such as VQ-VAE, within the VAE family of models .


What scientific hypothesis does this paper seek to validate?

The scientific hypothesis that this paper aims to validate is related to the performance of various self-supervised learning approaches for handwriting verification. The study compares different self-supervised learning methods, such as MoCo, SimClr, BYOL, SimSiam, FastSiam, DINO, BarlowTwins, and VicReg, against handcrafted feature baselines on the CEDAR AND Dataset with 10% train writers. The hypothesis focuses on evaluating the effectiveness of these self-supervised learning techniques in achieving higher test accuracy by analyzing the separation between writers (Intra distance - Inter distance) and their impact on accuracy with a small training dataset .


What new ideas, methods, or models does the paper propose? What are the characteristics and advantages compared to previous methods?

The paper on Self-Supervised Learning Based Handwriting Verification proposes several innovative ideas, methods, and models in the context of handwriting verification using self-supervised learning techniques :

  • Contrastive Self-Supervised Learning for Handwriting Verification: The paper introduces a contrastive self-supervised approach for handwriting verification, leveraging both coarse-grained and fine-grained features extracted from unlabeled handwritten datasets. This approach aims to capture high-level characteristics like overall shape, slantness, and spatial layout, as well as detailed features such as stroke thickness and character variations .

  • Generative Models and Feature Extraction: The study evaluates various generative self-supervised feature extraction methods, including AutoRegressive, Flow-Based, AutoEncoding, and GANs within the Generative Self-Supervised Learning for Handwriting Verification (GSSL-HV) framework. Notably, the Variational Autoencoder (VAE) outperformed other generative approaches, showing a relative gain in accuracy, while VICReg demonstrated superior performance over both generative and contrastive methods .

  • Model Architectures: The paper discusses the use of models like PixelRNN, PixelCNN, and Gated PixelCNN for autoregressive generative modeling, which predict raw pixel values using masked convolutions and multinomial loss functions. It also explores improvements in models like PixelCNN++ and PixelSNAIL, enhancing the efficiency and performance of Gated PixelCNN .

  • Training Objectives: The research explores the application of auto-regressive objectives like PixelCNN objective and BERT objective using transformer architecture for self-supervised learning tasks. These objectives have shown success in training Large Language Models like GPT2, enhancing generalization and downstream task performance with limited labels .

  • Future Research Directions: The paper suggests future research directions to enhance feature extraction capabilities by utilizing multiple unlabeled handwritten datasets such as the IAM handwriting dataset. It also emphasizes the importance of comparing similar and different handwritten content using advanced self-supervised approaches to further improve handwriting verification tasks . The paper on Self-Supervised Learning Based Handwriting Verification introduces innovative characteristics and advantages compared to previous methods in the field of handwriting verification using self-supervised learning techniques. Here are the key points based on the details in the paper:

  • Contrastive Self-Supervised Approach: The paper proposes a contrastive self-supervised approach for handwriting verification, aiming to extract both coarse-grained and fine-grained features from unlabeled handwritten datasets. This method captures high-level characteristics like overall shape, slantness, and spatial layout, as well as detailed features such as stroke thickness and character variations .

  • Generative Models Evaluation: The study evaluates various generative self-supervised feature extraction methods, highlighting the effectiveness of the Variational Autoencoder (VAE) over other generative approaches. VAE achieved a relative gain in accuracy, while VICReg outperformed both generative and contrastive methods, showing a relative accuracy gain of 9% over the baselines .

  • Model Architectures: The paper discusses the use of models like PixelRNN, PixelCNN, and Gated PixelCNN for autoregressive generative modeling, with improvements seen in models like PixelCNN++ and PixelSNAIL. These architectures enhance efficiency and performance in capturing handwriting details .

  • Training Objectives: The research explores the application of auto-regressive objectives like PixelCNN and BERT objectives using transformer architecture for self-supervised learning tasks. These objectives have shown success in training Large Language Models, enhancing generalization and downstream task performance with limited labels .

  • Future Research Directions: The paper suggests future research directions to enhance feature extraction capabilities by utilizing multiple unlabeled handwritten datasets and comparing similar and different handwritten content using advanced self-supervised approaches. This approach aims to further improve handwriting verification tasks .

These characteristics and advancements in self-supervised learning for handwriting verification offer promising avenues for improving feature extraction, model performance, and downstream task accuracy in the domain of handwriting verification tasks.


Do any related researches exist? Who are the noteworthy researchers on this topic in this field?What is the key to the solution mentioned in the paper?

Several related research studies exist in the field of self-supervised learning based handwriting verification. Noteworthy researchers in this area include Mahmoud Assran, Randall Balestriero, Quentin Duval, Florian Bordes, Ishan Misra, Piotr Bojanowski, Pascal Vincent, Michael Rabbat, Nicolas Ballas, Eikan Wang, Xiaodong Wang, William Wen, Shunting Zhang, Xu Zhao, Keren Zhou, Richard Zou, Ajit Mathews, Gregory Chanan, Peng Wu, Soumith Chintala, and many others .

The key to the solution mentioned in the paper involves utilizing self-supervised learning to generate robust handwritten features, which can enhance the downstream task of handwriting verification even with limited training labels. The paper evaluates various approaches such as AutoRegressive, Flow Based, AutoEncoding, GANs, and compares the performance of different self-supervised learning frameworks. Notably, the Variational Autoencoder (VAE) outperformed other generative self-supervised feature extraction methods, achieving a significant relative gain in accuracy. Additionally, the Vicreg approach demonstrated superior performance over both generative and contrastive methods, showcasing a substantial accuracy improvement over the baselines .


How were the experiments in the paper designed?

The experiments in the paper were designed with a focus on self-supervised learning for handwriting verification. Various methods and architectures were explored to enhance the verification process:

  • The experiments involved pre-training and fine-tuning processes using different self-supervised learning techniques such as BYOL, VicReg, BarlowTwins, FastSiam, SimSiam, and DINO .
  • Different feature extractors like GSC, HOGS, ResNet-18, and Vision Transformer (ViT) were utilized for the experiments .
  • The experiments included the use of various augmentation techniques, network architectures, and training setups to evaluate the performance of the models .
  • The experiments focused on generating both coarse-grained and fine-grained features to capture high-level and detailed characteristics of the handwriting styles .
  • The experiments also involved downstream tasks with different levels of granularity to assess the applicability of the contrastive self-supervised approach in handwriting verification .
  • The paper detailed the implementation details, model architectures, training configurations, and evaluation metrics used in the experiments to validate the effectiveness of the self-supervised learning methods for handwriting verification .

What is the dataset used for quantitative evaluation? Is the code open source?

The dataset used for quantitative evaluation in the study is the CEDAR AND dataset . The code for the project is open source and available on GitHub at the following link: https://github.com/lightly-ai/lightly .


Do the experiments and results in the paper provide good support for the scientific hypotheses that need to be verified? Please analyze.

The experiments and results presented in the paper provide substantial support for the scientific hypotheses that need to be verified. The paper extensively evaluates data augmentation techniques for handwriting verification in the context of contrastive self-supervised pre-training . It discusses the importance of maintaining consistency and natural variability in handwritten styles to enhance generalization within specific domains . Additionally, the paper explores the effectiveness of self-supervised contrastive methods for handwriting verification, showcasing the benefits of both coarse-grained and fine-grained features in extracting high-level characteristics and details from handwritten samples .

Moreover, the paper delves into the downstream task granularity of self-supervised contrastive methods, highlighting their better applicability with coarse-grained tasks involving higher-level attributes compared to fine-grained tasks . It emphasizes the significance of both coarse-grained and fine-grained features in extracting high-level characteristics and detailed aspects of handwriting styles, which aligns with the scientific hypotheses related to the contrastive self-supervised approach for handwriting verification .

Overall, the experiments and results presented in the paper offer strong empirical evidence supporting the scientific hypotheses related to the effectiveness of contrastive self-supervised learning for handwriting verification, showcasing the importance of feature extraction at different levels of granularity to capture both high-level and detailed characteristics of handwritten samples .


What are the contributions of this paper?

The contributions of the paper include:

  • Introducing a new approach to self-supervised learning
  • Exploring training self-supervised vision transformers empirically
  • Proposing Vicregl for self-supervised learning of local visual features
  • Discussing the use of contrastive visual representation learning for visual models
  • Improving flow-based generative models with variational dequantization and architecture design
  • Introducing Vicreg: Variance-invariance-covariance regularization for self-supervised learning

What work can be continued in depth?

Future research in the field of self-supervised learning for handwriting verification can focus on enhancing feature extraction capabilities using multiple unlabeled handwritten datasets such as the IAM handwriting dataset. Additionally, comparing similar and different handwritten content using state-of-the-art self-supervised approaches could be explored to further improve the downstream task of handwriting verification .

Scan the QR code to ask more questions about the paper
© 2025 Powerdrill. All rights reserved.