A Gradient Flow Framework For Analyzing Network Pruning
Ekdeep Singh Lubana, Robert P. Dick
Abstract
Recent network pruning methods focus on pruning models early-on in training. To estimate the impact of removing a parameter, these methods use importance measures that were originally designed to prune trained models. Despite lacking justification for their use early-on in training, such measures result in surprisingly low accuracy loss. To better explain this behavior, we develop a general framework that uses gradient flow to unify state-of-the-art importance measures through the norm of model parameters. We use this framework to determine the relationship between pruning measures and evolution of model parameters, establishing several results related to pruning models early-on in training: (i) magnitude-based pruning removes parameters that contribute least to reduction in loss, resulting in models that converge faster than magnitude-agnostic methods; (ii) loss-preservation based pruning preserves first-order model evolution dynamics and is therefore appropriate for pruning minimally trained models; and (iii) gradient-norm based pruning affects second-order model evolution dynamics, such that increasing gradient norm via pruning can produce poorly performing models. We validate our claims on several VGG-13, MobileNet-V1, and ResNet-56 models trained on CIFAR-10/CIFAR-100. 1 gradient flow refers to gradient descent with infinitesimal learning rate; see Equation 6 for a short primer.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 13b3227b-c96f-4205-a524-8b9ed8aed3d2Cited by top-tier papers21
- Mechanistically analyzing the effects of fine-tuning on procedurally defined tasksSamyak Jain, Robert Kirk, Ekdeep Singh Lubana, Robert P. Dick et al.ICLR 2024 · 108 citations
- Gradient Flow in Sparse Neural Networks and How Lottery Tickets WinUtku Evci, Yani Ioannou, Cem Keskin, Yann N. DauphinAAAI 2022 · 106 citations
- GDP: Stabilized Neural Network Pruning via Gates with Differentiable PolarizationYi Guo, Huan Yuan, Jianchao Tan, Zhangyang Wang et al.ICCV 2021 · 52 citations
- Validating the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis with Inertial Manifold TheoryZeru Zhang, Jiayin Jin, Zijie Zhang, Yang Zhou et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 45 citations
- Learn more, but bother less: parameter efficient continual learningFuli Qiao, Mehrdad MahdaviNeurIPS 2024 · 36 citations
Builds on5
- Picking Winning Tickets Before Training by Preserving Gradient FlowChaoqi Wang, Guodong Zhang, Roger B. GrosseICLR 2020 · 743 citations
- Proving the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Pruning is All You NeedEran Malach, Gilad Yehudai, Shai Shalev-Shwartz, Ohad ShamirICML 2020 · 327 citations
- A Signal Propagation Perspective for Pruning Neural Networks at InitializationNamhoon Lee, Thalaiyasingam Ajanthan, Stephen Gould, Philip H. S. TorrICLR 2020 · 174 citations
- Good Subnetworks Provably Exist: Pruning via Greedy Forward SelectionMao Ye, Chengyue Gong, Lizhen Nie, Denny Zhou et al.ICML 2020 · 123 citations
- Fast Sparse ConvNetsErich Elsen, Marat Dukhan, Trevor Gale, Karen SimonyanCVPR 2020
Related papers
- Prior Gradient Mask Guided Pruning-Aware Fine-TuningLinhang Cai, Zhulin An, Chuanguang Yang, Yangchun Yan et al.AAAI 2022 · 44 citations
- Entropy Induced Pruning Framework for Convolutional Neural NetworksYiheng Lu, Ziyu Guan, Yaming Yang, Wei Zhao et al.AAAI 2024 · 9 citations
- Pruning neural networks without any data by iteratively conserving synaptic flowHidenori Tanaka, Daniel Kunin, Daniel L. K. Yamins, Surya GanguliNeurIPS 2020 · 884 citations
- When to Prune? A Policy towards Early Structural PruningMaying Shen, Pavlo Molchanov, Hongxu Yin, José M. ÁlvarezCVPR 2022 · 46 citations
- Pruning from ScratchYulong Wang, Xiaolu Zhang, Lingxi Xie, Jun Zhou et al.AAAI 2020 · 219 citations
