# Image Classification on CIFAR-10-LT step imbalance r=0.01 (test)

Source: [Image Classification on CIFAR-10-LT step imbalance r=0.01 (test)](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/image-classification-on-cifar-10-lt-step-imbalance-r-0-01-test>)

Collection index: [llms.txt](<https://www.sota2.com/research/llms.txt>)

Data updated: 2026-02-26T05:33:56.416Z

Evaluation of Image Classification performance on the test split of the CIFAR-10-LT dataset configured with a step imbalance ratio (r) of 0.01.

A research result applies to its stated dataset, split, metric and evaluation configuration. Compare like-for-like settings, preserve the metric's unit and direction, and distinguish paper-reported results from independent reproduction. The best result recorded here is not a claim of exhaustive, current global coverage.

| Scope | Recorded value |
| --- | --- |
| Task | Image Classification |
| Dataset (including any stated split) | CIFAR-10-LT step imbalance r=0.01 (test) |
| Metric | Accuracy (%) |
| Unit | PERCENT |
| Direction | Higher is better |
| Results loaded | 4 of 4 |
| Coverage | All results currently returned for this benchmark |

Evaluation settings may differ between results. The original papers and recorded configurations are needed to establish comparability. A shared metric name alone does not establish an identical protocol.

## Metrics

- [Accuracy (%)](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/image-classification-on-cifar-10-lt-step-imbalance-r-0-01-test.md?metric=Accuracy%20(%25)>): Higher is better; unit: PERCENT.

- [Gap Frequency](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/image-classification-on-cifar-10-lt-step-imbalance-r-0-01-test.md?metric=Gap%20Frequency>): Lower is better; unit: PERCENT.

- [Gap Rarity](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/image-classification-on-cifar-10-lt-step-imbalance-r-0-01-test.md?metric=Gap%20Rarity>): Lower is better; unit: PERCENT.

## Recorded results

| Method | Accuracy (%) | Result date | Report paper |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| SimSiam, balanced | 85.8 | Not recorded | 68fa6c961e209131cea34acd |
| SimSiam+rwSAM | 85.6 | Not recorded | 68fa6c961e209131cea34acd |
| SimSiam+SAM | 84.7 | Not recorded | 68fa6c961e209131cea34acd |
| SimSiam | 84.3 | Not recorded | 68fa6c961e209131cea34acd |

### SimSiam, balanced

Accuracy (%): 85.8. Result ID: 698f22c83a6c314849f61c99.

[Reporting paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa6c961e209131cea34acd.md>)

Recorded evaluation configuration: {"evaluation":"linear probe","domain":"ID evaluation","training\_mode":"balanced SSL"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction.

### SimSiam+rwSAM

Accuracy (%): 85.6. Result ID: 698f22c83a6c314849f61c9a.

[Reporting paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa6c961e209131cea34acd.md>)

[Method origin paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa6c961e209131cea34acd.md>)

[Implementation](<https://github.com/Liuhong99/Imbalanced-SSL>)

Recorded evaluation configuration: {"evaluation":"linear probe","domain":"ID evaluation"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction.

### SimSiam+SAM

Accuracy (%): 84.7. Result ID: 698f22c83a6c314849f61c98.

[Reporting paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa6c961e209131cea34acd.md>)

[Method origin paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa69d81e209131cea248fb.md>)

[Implementation](<https://github.com/google-research/sam>)

Recorded evaluation configuration: {"evaluation":"linear probe","domain":"ID evaluation"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction.

### SimSiam

Accuracy (%): 84.3. Result ID: 698f22c83a6c314849f61c97.

[Reporting paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa6c961e209131cea34acd.md>)

[Method origin paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa68c61e209131cea1e54d.md>)

Recorded evaluation configuration: {"evaluation":"linear probe","domain":"ID evaluation"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction.

Page 1 of 1. This is an index page, not the full collection.