With the rapid increase of large-scale, real-world datasets, it becomes critical to address the problem of long-tailed data distribution (i.e., a few classes account for most of the data, while most classes are under-represented). Existing solutions typically adopt class re-balancing strategies such as re-sampling and re-weighting based on the number of observations for each class. In this work, we argue that as the number of samples increases, the additional benefit of a newly added data point will diminish. We introduce a novel theoretical framework to measure data overlap by associating with each sample a small neighboring region rather than a single point. The effective number of samples is defined as the volume of samples and can be calculated by a simple formula @math , where @math is the number of samples and @math is a hyperparameter. We design a re-weighting scheme that uses the effective number of samples for each class to re-balance the loss, thereby yielding a class-balanced loss. Comprehensive experiments are conducted on artificially induced long-tailed CIFAR datasets and large-scale datasets including ImageNet and iNaturalist. Our results show that when trained with the proposed class-balanced loss, the network is able to achieve significant performance gains on long-tailed datasets.
@cite_9: This paper presents a novel adaptive synthetic (ADASYN) sampling approach for learning from imbalanced data sets. The essential idea of ADASYN is to use a weighted distribution for different minority class examples according to their level of difficulty in learning, where more synthetic data is generated for minority class examples that are harder to learn compared to those minority examples that are easier to learn. As a result, the ADASYN approach improves learning with respect to the data distributions in two ways: (1) reducing the bias introduced by the class imbalance, and (2) adaptively shifting the classification decision boundary toward the difficult examples. Simulation analyses on several machine learning data sets show the effectiveness of this method across five evaluation metrics.
@cite_53: An approach to the construction of classifiers from imbalanced datasets is described. A dataset is imbalanced if the classification categories are not approximately equally represented. Often real-world data sets are predominately composed of "normal" examples with only a small percentage of "abnormal" or "interesting" examples. It is also the case that the cost of misclassifying an abnormal (interesting) example as a normal example is often much higher than the cost of the reverse error. Under-sampling of the majority (normal) class has been proposed as a good means of increasing the sensitivity of a classifier to the minority class. This paper shows that a combination of our method of oversampling the minority (abnormal)cla ss and under-sampling the majority (normal) class can achieve better classifier performance (in ROC space)tha n only under-sampling the majority class. This paper also shows that a combination of our method of over-sampling the minority class and under-sampling the majority class can achieve better classifier performance (in ROC space)t han varying the loss ratios in Ripper or class priors in Naive Bayes. Our method of over-sampling the minority class involves creating synthetic minority class examples. Experiments are performed using C4.5, Ripper and a Naive Bayes classifier. The method is evaluated using the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (AUC)and the ROC convex hull strategy.
@cite_18: 
@cite_17: This paper takes a new look at two sampling schemes commonly used to adapt machine learning algorithms to imbalanced classes and misclassification costs. It uses a performance analysis technique called cost curves to explore the interaction of over and undersampling with the decision tree learner C4.5. C4.5 was chosen as, when combined with one of the sampling schemes, it is quickly becoming the community standard when evaluating new cost sensitive learning algorithms. This paper shows that using C4.5 with undersampling establishes a reasonable standard for algorithmic comparison. But it is recommended that the cheapest class classifier be part of that standard as it can be better than under-sampling for relatively modest costs. Over-sampling, however, shows little sensitivity, there is often little dierence in performance when misclassification costs are changed.
Over-sampling adds repeated samples from minor classes, which could cause the model to overfit. To solve this, novel samples can be either interpolated from neighboring samples @cite_53 or synthesized @cite_9 @cite_18 for minor classes. However, the model is still error-prone due to noise in the novel samples. It was argued that even if over-sampling incurs risks from removing important samples, under-sampling is still preferred over over-sampling @cite_17 .