Demystifying When Pruning Works via Representation Hierarchies
Shwai He, Guoheng Sun, Haichao Zhang, Yun Fu, Ang Li
Abstract
Network pruning, which removes less important parameters or architectures, is often expected to improve efficiency while preserving performance. However, this expectation does not consistently hold across language tasks: pruned models can perform well on non-generative tasks but frequently fail in generative settings. To demystify how such discrepancies arise under pruning, we analyze network pruning from a representation-hierarchy perspective, decomposing the internal computation of language models into three sequential spaces: embedding (hidden representations), logit (pre-softmax outputs), and probability (post-softmax distributions). While representations in the embedding and logit spaces are largely robust to pruning-induced perturbations, the subsequent nonlinear transformation from logits to the probability space amplifies such deviations, whose persistence across time steps leads to substantial degradation during generation. By contrast, the stability of the categorical-token probability subspace, together with the robustness of the embedding space, supports the effectiveness of pruning for non-generative tasks such as retrieval and multiple-choice classification. Our representation-level analysis disentangles the effects of pruning across tasks and offers practical guidance for applying pruning effectively. The code is available in the project repository.
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 4b45788a-9fd0-4696-911e-91dfaba1b7f3Builds on9
- Measuring Massive Multitask Language UnderstandingDan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou et al.ICLR 2021 · 7,905 citations
- Pruning neural networks without any data by iteratively conserving synaptic flowHidenori Tanaka, Daniel Kunin, Daniel L. K. Yamins, Surya GanguliNeurIPS 2020 · 884 citations
- A Simple and Effective Pruning Approach for Large Language ModelsMingjie Sun, Zhuang Liu, Anna Bair, J. Zico KolterICLR 2024 · 794 citations
- Learning N: M Fine-grained Structured Sparse Neural Networks From ScratchAojun Zhou, Yukun Ma, Junnan Zhu, Jianbo Liu et al.ICLR 2021 · 301 citations
- Soft Threshold Weight Reparameterization for Learnable SparsityAditya Kusupati, Vivek Ramanujan, Raghav Somani, Mitchell Wortsman et al.ICML 2020 · 266 citations
Related papers
- Understanding Performance Collapse in Layer-Pruned Large Language Models via Decision Representation Transitionsboyu shi, Chang Liu, Chuanbao Gao, Xu Yang et al.ICML 2026 · 1 citation
- Disentangling the Roles of Representation and Selection in Data PruningYupei Du, Yingjin Song, Hugh Mee Wong, Daniil Ignatev et al.ACL 2025
- Break It Down: Evidence for Structural Compositionality in Neural NetworksMichael A. Lepori, Thomas Serre, Ellie PavlickNeurIPS 2023 · 66 citations
- Exploring Intrinsic Dimension for Vision-Language Model PruningHanzhang Wang, Jiawen Zhang, Qingyuan MaICML 2024 · 5 citations
- Skip-It? Theoretical Conditions for Layer Skipping in Vision–Language ModelsMax Hartman, Vidhata Jayaraman, Moulik Choraria, Akhil Bhimaraju et al.ICML 2026 · 1 citation
