aiqbench analysis
This study benchmarks label-efficient strategies—specifically transfer learning, active learning, and pseudo-labeling—for classifying ground-based sky images using a frozen ResNet50 backbone. The findings indicate that supervised transfer learning alone achieves high accuracy with minimal annotations, while active and semi-supervised methods offer only marginal aggregate gains over this strong baseline. For practitioners in atmospheric monitoring or solar forecasting, the primary takeaway is that leveraging pretrained models significantly reduces annotation costs without relying on complex new architectures or substantial additional data acquisition efforts.
Label-Efficient Learning for Ground-Based Sky-Image Classification: A Benchmark of Transfer Learning, Active Learning, and Pseudo-Labeling on GCD
arXiv:2609.26631v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Accurate ground-based cloud classification is important for atmospheric monitoring, solar-energy forecasting, aviation weather assessment, and climate observation systems. However, reliable sky-image annotation is time-consuming, especially when cloud types are visually similar or mixed. We study the label efficiency of deep learning for ground-based cloud classification using the Ground-based Cloud Dataset (GCD). Rather than proposing a new architecture, we benchmark three practical strategies under limited annotation budgets: supervised transfer learning, uncertainty-based active learning, and high-confidence pseudo-labeling. An ImageNet-pretrained ResNet50 is used as a common frozen backbone, with experiments repeated over five random seeds for label budgets from $1\%$ to $100\%$ of the training labels. Supervised transfer learning is already highly label-efficient: test accuracy increases from $0.635 \pm 0.018$ with $1\%$ labels to $0.730 \pm 0.002$ with $40\%$ labels, approaching the full-label result of $0.735 \pm 0.003$. Active learning and pseudo-labeling are competitive with supervised sampling and provide small improvements for some metrics and budgets, but neither gives a large or consistent aggregate gain. Diagnostic analyses show that accepted pseudo-labels are reliable, with accuracy from $0.946$ to $0.977$, but biased toward easier high-confidence sky-type groups. In contrast, uncertainty sampling preferentially queries visually challenging groups, including Mixed and the confusable Stratocumulus and Cumulonimbus groups, but these targeted acquisitions yield only modest gains. Overall, transfer learning substantially reduces annotation requirements for GCD, while simple active and semi-supervised strategies provide limited additional benefit over a strong supervised baseline.
Abstract:Accurate ground-based cloud classification is important for atmospheric monitoring, solar-energy forecasting, aviation weather assessment, and climate observation systems. However, reliable sky-image annotation is time-consuming, especially when cloud types are visually similar or mixed. We study the label efficiency of deep learning for ground-based cloud classification using the Ground-based Cloud Dataset (GCD). Rather than proposing a new architecture, we benchmark three practical strategies under limited annotation budgets: supervised transfer learning, uncertainty-based active learning, and high-confidence pseudo-labeling. An ImageNet-pretrained ResNet50 is used as a common frozen backbone, with experiments repeated over five random seeds for label budgets from $1\%$ to $100\%$ of the training labels. Supervised transfer learning is already highly label-efficient: test accuracy increases from $0.635 \pm 0.018$ with $1\%$ labels to $0.730 \pm 0.002$ with $40\%$ labels, approaching the full-label result of $0.735 \pm 0.003$. Active learning and pseudo-labeling are competitive with supervised sampling and provide small improvements for some metrics and budgets, but neither gives a large or consistent aggregate gain. Diagnostic analyses show that accepted pseudo-labels are reliable, with accuracy from $0.946$ to $0.977$, but biased toward easier high-confidence sky-type groups. In contrast, uncertainty sampling preferentially queries visually challenging groups, including Mixed and the confusable Stratocumulus and Cumulonimbus groups, but these targeted acquisitions yield only modest gains. Overall, transfer learning substantially reduces annotation requirements for GCD, while simple active and semi-supervised strategies provide limited additional benefit over a strong supervised baseline.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV)
arXiv:2609.26631 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2609.26631v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.26631 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 333 words
Related coverage
[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · Oct 3, 2026
AI in healthcare: applications and best practices
Databricks · Jul 24, 2026
[AINews] Opus 5.5 is good at explainer videos
Latent Space · Sep 29, 2026
[AINews] The Future of Latent Space
Latent Space · Sep 25, 2026