ThriftyNets: Convolutional Neural Networks with Tiny Parameter Budget
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
Deep Neural Networks are state-of-the-art in a large number of challenges in machine learning. However, to reach the best performance they require a huge pool of parameters. Indeed, typical deep convolutional architectures present an increasing number of feature maps as we go deeper in the network, whereas spatial resolution of inputs is decreased through downsampling operations. This means that most of the parameters lay in the final layers, while a large portion of the computations are performed by a small fraction of the total parameters in the first layers. In an effort to use every parameter of a network at its maximum, we propose a new convolutional neural network architecture, called ThriftyNet. In ThriftyNet, only one convolutional layer is defined and used recursively, leading to a maximal parameter factorization. In complement, normalization, non-linearities, downsamplings and shortcut ensure sufficient expressivity of the model. ThriftyNet achieves competitive performance on a tiny parameters budget, exceeding 91% accuracy on CIFAR-10 with less than 40 k parameters in total, 74.3% on CIFAR-100 with less than 600 k parameters, and 67.1% On ImageNet ILSVRC 2012 with no more than 4.15 M parameters. However, the proposed method typically requires more computations than existing counterparts.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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