Explore and Establish Synergistic Effects Between Weight Pruning and Coreset Selection in Neural Network Training
Weilin Wan, Fan Yi, Weizhong Zhang, Quan Zhou, Cheng Jin
Abstract
Modern deep neural networks rely heavily on massive model weights and training samples, incurring substantial computational costs. Weight pruning and coreset selection are two emerging paradigms proposed to improve computational efficiency. In this paper, we first explore the interplay between redundant weights and training samples through a transparent analysis: redundant samples, particularly noisy ones, cause model weights to become unnecessarily overtuned to fit them, complicating the identification of irrelevant weights during pruning; conversely, irrelevant weights tend to overfit noisy data, undermining coreset selection effectiveness. To further investigate and harness this interplay in deep learning, we develop a Simultaneous Weight and Sample Tailoring mechanism (SWaST) that alternately performs weight pruning and coreset selection to establish a synergistic effect in training. During this investigation, we observe that when simultaneously removing a large number of weights and samples, a phenomenon we term critical double-loss can occur, where important weights and their supportive samples are mistakenly eliminated at the same time, leading to model instability and nearly irreversible degradation that cannot be recovered in subsequent training. Unlike classic machine learning models, this issue can arise in deep learning due to the lack of theoretical guarantees on the correctness of weight pruning and coreset selection, which explains why these paradigms are often developed independently. We mitigate this by integrating a state preservation mechanism into SWaST, enabling stable joint optimization. Extensive experiments reveal a strong synergy between pruning and coreset selection across varying prune rates and coreset sizes, delivering accuracy boosts of up to 17.83% alongside 10% to 90% FLOPs reductions.
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.
Builds on15
- Deep Learning on a Data Diet: Finding Important Examples Early in TrainingMansheej Paul, Surya Ganguli, Gintare Karolina DziugaiteNeurIPS 2021 · 806 citations
- Estimating Training Data Influence by Tracing Gradient DescentGarima Pruthi, Frederick Liu, Satyen Kale, Mukund SundararajanNeurIPS 2020 · 784 citations
- Rigging the Lottery: Making All Tickets WinnersUtku Evci, Trevor Gale, Jacob Menick, Pablo Samuel Castro et al.ICML 2020 · 723 citations
- Coresets for Data-efficient Training of Machine Learning ModelsBaharan Mirzasoleiman, Jeff A. Bilmes, Jure LeskovecICML 2020 · 494 citations
- Comparing Rewinding and Fine-tuning in Neural Network PruningAlex Renda, Jonathan Frankle, Michael CarbinICLR 2020 · 437 citations
Related papers
- Efficient Representativeness-Aware Coreset SelectionZihao Cheng, Binrui Wu, Zhiwei Li, Yuesen Liao et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 1 citation
- Repeated Random Sampling for Minimizing the Time-to-Accuracy of LearningPatrik Okanovic, Roger Waleffe, Vasilis Mageirakos, Konstantinos E. Nikolakakis et al.ICLR 2024 · 29 citations
- Lightweight Dataset Pruning without Full Training via Example Difficulty and Prediction UncertaintyYeseul Cho, Baekrok Shin, Changmin Kang, Chulhee YunICML 2025
- UNSEEN: Enhancing Dataset Pruning from a Generalization PerspectiveFurui Xu, Shaobo Wang, Jiajun Zhang, Chenghao Sun et al.AAAI 2026
- GDeR: Safeguarding Efficiency, Balancing, and Robustness via Prototypical Graph PruningGuibin Zhang, Haonan Dong, Yuchen Zhang, Zhixun Li et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 9 citations
