Deep Geometric Knowledge Distillation with Graphs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In most cases deep learning architectures are trained disregarding the amount of operations and energy consumption. However, some applications, like embedded systems, can be resource-constrained during inference. A popular approach to reduce the size of a deep learning architecture consists in distilling knowledge from a bigger network (teacher) to a smaller one (student). Directly training the student to mimic the teacher representation can be effective, but it requires that both share the same latent space dimensions. In this work, we focus instead on relative knowledge distillation (RKD), which considers the geometry of the respective latent spaces, allowing for dimension-agnostic transfer of knowledge. Specifically we introduce a graph-based RKD method, in which graphs are used to capture the geometry of latent spaces. Using classical computer vision benchmarks, we demonstrate the ability of the proposed method to efficiently distillate knowledge from the teacher to the student, leading to better accuracy for the same budget as compared to existing RKD alternatives.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it