Abstract
Statistically consistent methods based on the noise transition matrix (T) offer a theoretically grounded solution to Learning with Noisy Labels (LNL), with guarantees of convergence to the optimal clean-data classifier. In practice, however, these methods are often outperformed by empirical approaches such as sample selection, and this gap is usually attributed to the difficulty of accurately estimating T. The common assumption is that, given a perfect T, noise-correction methods would recover their theoretical advantage. In this work, we put this longstanding hypothesis to a decisive test. We conduct experiments under idealized conditions, providing correction methods with a perfect, oracle transition matrix. Even under these ideal conditions, we observe that these methods still suffer from performance collapse during training. This compellingly demonstrates that the failure is not fundamentally a T-estimation problem, but stems from a more deeply rooted flaw. To explain this behaviour, we provide a unified analysis that links three levels: macroscopic convergence states, microscopic optimisation dynamics, and information-theoretic limits on what can be learned from noisy labels. Together, these results give a formal account of why ideal noise correction fails and offer concrete guidance for designing more reliable methods for learning with noisy labels.
