The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2010.05113 · v2 · pith:N7Q3BUEB · submitted 2020-10-10 · cs.LG · stat.ML

Contrastive Representation Learning: A Framework and Review

Reviewed by Pithpith:N7Q3BUEBopen to challenge →

classification cs.LG stat.ML
keywords learningcontrastiveframeworkprocessingrepresentationcomputerdifferentdiscuss
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Contrastive Learning has recently received interest due to its success in self-supervised representation learning in the computer vision domain. However, the origins of Contrastive Learning date as far back as the 1990s and its development has spanned across many fields and domains including Metric Learning and natural language processing. In this paper we provide a comprehensive literature review and we propose a general Contrastive Representation Learning framework that simplifies and unifies many different contrastive learning methods. We also provide a taxonomy for each of the components of contrastive learning in order to summarise it and distinguish it from other forms of machine learning. We then discuss the inductive biases which are present in any contrastive learning system and we analyse our framework under different views from various sub-fields of Machine Learning. Examples of how contrastive learning has been applied in computer vision, natural language processing, audio processing, and others, as well as in Reinforcement Learning are also presented. Finally, we discuss the challenges and some of the most promising future research directions ahead.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. An Initial Exploration of Contrastive Prompt Tuning to Generate Energy-Efficient Code

    cs.LG 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Contrastive Prompt Tuning raises code accuracy on two of three tested models but produces inconsistent energy-efficiency gains that depend on model, language, and task.