Large pre-trained models such as CLIP offer consistent accuracy across a range of data distributions when performing zero-shot inference (i.e., without fine-tuning on a specific dataset). Although existing fine-tuning approaches substantially improve
accuracy in-distribution, they also reduce out-of-distribution robustness. We address this tension by introducing a simple and effective method for improving robustness: ensembling the weights of the zero-shot and fine-tuned models. Compared to standard fine-tuning, the resulting weight-space ensembles provide large accuracy improvements out-of-distribution, while matching or improving in-distribution accuracy. On ImageNet and five derived distribution shifts, weight-space ensembles improve out-of-distribution accuracy by 2 to 10 percentage points while increasing in-distribution accuracy by nearly 1 percentage point relative to standard fine-tuning. These improvements come at no additional computational cost during fine-tuning or inference.
In the past few years, we have witnessed remarkable breakthroughs in self-supervised representation learning. Despite the success and adoption of representations learned through this paradigm, much is yet to be understood about how different training
methods and datasets influence performance on downstream tasks. In this paper, we analyze contrastive approaches as one of the most successful and popular variants of self-supervised representation learning. We perform this analysis from the perspective of the training algorithms, pre-training datasets and end tasks. We examine over 700 training experiments including 30 encoders, 4 pre-training datasets and 20 diverse downstream tasks. Our experiments address various questions regarding the performance of self-supervised models compared to their supervised counterparts, current benchmarks used for evaluation, and the effect of the pre-training data on end task performance. Our Visual Representation Benchmark (ViRB) is available at: https://github.com/allenai/virb.
