# Image Classification on CIFAR-10 (Standard & Robustness Evaluation)

Source: [Image Classification on CIFAR-10 (Standard & Robustness Evaluation)](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/image-classification-on-cifar-10-standard-and-robustness-evaluation>)

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

Data updated: 2026-02-26T06:04:45.249Z

Evaluation of Image Classification performance on the CIFAR-10 dataset, reporting both standard accuracy under nominal conditions and a general measure of robustness accuracy.

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 |
| Metric | Standard Accuracy |
| Unit | PERCENT |
| Direction | Higher is better |
| Results loaded | 3 of 3 |
| 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

- [Standard Accuracy](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/image-classification-on-cifar-10-standard-and-robustness-evaluation.md?metric=Standard%20Accuracy>): Higher is better; unit: PERCENT.

- [Robust Accuracy](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/image-classification-on-cifar-10-standard-and-robustness-evaluation.md?metric=Robust%20Accuracy>): Higher is better; unit: PERCENT.

## Recorded results

| Method | Standard Accuracy | Result date | Report paper |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Nie et al. | 93.53 | Not recorded | 68fa71671e209131cea5138a |
| Nie et al. | 92.35 | Not recorded | 68fa71671e209131cea5138a |
| GDPM | 21.3 | Not recorded | 68fa71671e209131cea5138a |

### Nie et al.

Standard Accuracy: 93.53. Result ID: 6991ce3f3a6c3148490ab2a5.

[Reporting paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa71671e209131cea5138a.md>)

[Method origin paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa6c841e209131cea3472d.md>)

Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Classifier":"WideResNet-28-10"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction.

### Nie et al.

Standard Accuracy: 92.35. Result ID: 6991ce3f3a6c3148490ab2a3.

[Reporting paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa71671e209131cea5138a.md>)

[Method origin paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa6c841e209131cea3472d.md>)

Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Classifier":"WideResNet-70-16"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction.

### GDPM

Standard Accuracy: 21.3. Result ID: 6991ce3f3a6c3148490ab2a4.

[Reporting paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa71671e209131cea5138a.md>)

[Method origin paper](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa6ce61e209131cea369e5.md>)

Recorded evaluation configuration: {"Classifier":"WideResNet-28-10"}. This record does not assert independent reproduction.

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