Sparse Double Descent: Where Network Pruning Aggravates Overfitting
Zheng He, Zeke Xie, Quanzhi Zhu, Zengchang Qin
Abstract
People usually believe that network pruning not only reduces the computational cost of deep networks, but also prevents overfitting by decreasing model capacity. However, our work surprisingly discovers that network pruning sometimes even aggravates overfitting. We report an unexpected sparse double descent phenomenon that, as we increase model sparsity via network pruning, test performance first gets worse (due to overfitting), then gets better (due to relieved overfitting), and gets worse at last (due to forgetting useful information). While recent studies focused on the deep double descent with respect to model overparameterization, they failed to recognize that sparsity may also cause double descent. In this paper, we have three main contributions. First, we report the novel sparse double descent phenomenon through extensive experiments. Second, for this phenomenon, we propose a novel learning distance interpretation that the curve of learning distance of sparse models (from initialized parameters to final parameters) may correlate with the sparse double descent curve well and reflect generalization better than minima flatness. Third, in the context of sparse double descent, a winning ticket in the lottery ticket hypothesis surprisingly may not always win.
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 8973d3a9-7f89-4a72-8364-46d655a64054Cited by top-tier papers7
- A U-turn on Double Descent: Rethinking Parameter Counting in Statistical LearningAlicia Curth, Alan Jeffares, Mihaela van der SchaarNeurIPS 2023 · 42 citations
- Deep Learning Through A Telescoping Lens: A Simple Model Provides Empirical Insights On Grokking, Gradient Boosting & BeyondAlan Jeffares, Alicia Curth, Mihaela van der SchaarNeurIPS 2024 · 11 citations
- Dynamic Sparse Training via Balancing the Exploration-Exploitation Trade-offShaoyi Huang, Bowen Lei, Dongkuan Xu, Hongwu Peng et al.DAC 2023 · 7 citations
- DSD²: Can We Dodge Sparse Double Descent and Compress the Neural Network Worry-Free?Victor Quétu, Enzo TartaglioneAAAI 2024 · 6 citations
- Calibrating the Rigged Lottery: Making All Tickets ReliableBowen Lei, Ruqi Zhang, Dongkuan Xu, Bani K. MallickICLR 2023 · 2 citations
Builds on22
- Sharpness-aware Minimization for Efficiently Improving GeneralizationPierre Foret, Ariel Kleiner, Hossein Mobahi, Behnam NeyshaburICLR 2021 · 1,861 citations
- Deep Double Descent: Where Bigger Models and More Data HurtPreetum Nakkiran, Gal Kaplun, Yamini Bansal, Tristan Yang et al.ICLR 2020 · 1,108 citations
- Linear Mode Connectivity and the Lottery Ticket HypothesisJonathan Frankle, Gintare Karolina Dziugaite, Daniel M. Roy, Michael CarbinICML 2020 · 750 citations
- Fantastic Generalization Measures and Where to Find ThemYiding Jiang, Behnam Neyshabur, Hossein Mobahi, Dilip Krishnan et al.ICLR 2020 · 705 citations
- Comparing Rewinding and Fine-tuning in Neural Network PruningAlex Renda, Jonathan Frankle, Michael CarbinICLR 2020 · 437 citations
Related papers
- Provable Benefits of Overparameterization in Model Compression: From Double Descent to Pruning Neural NetworksXiangyu Chang, Yingcong Li, Samet Oymak, Christos ThrampoulidisAAAI 2021 · 58 citations
- Lottery Ticket Preserves Weight Correlation: Is It Desirable or Not?Ning Liu, Geng Yuan, Zhengping Che, Xuan Shen et al.ICML 2021 · 34 citations
- Plant 'n' Seek: Can You Find the Winning Ticket?Jonas Fischer, Rebekka BurkholzICLR 2022 · 21 citations
- Dual Lottery Ticket HypothesisYue Bai, Huan Wang, Zhiqiang Tao, Kunpeng Li et al.ICLR 2022 · 49 citations
- Analyzing Lottery Ticket Hypothesis from PAC-Bayesian Theory PerspectiveKeitaro Sakamoto, Issei SatoNeurIPS 2022 · 11 citations
