Where Should We Begin? A Low-Level Exploration of Weight Initialization Impact on Quantized Behaviour of Deep Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the proliferation of deep convolutional neural network (CNN) algorithms for mobile processing, limited precision quantization has become an essential tool for CNN efficiency. Consequently, various works have sought to design fixed precision quantization algorithms and quantization-focused optimization techniques that minimize quantization induced performance degradation. However, there is little concrete understanding of how various CNN design decisions/best practices affect quantized inference behaviour. Weight initialization strategies are often associated with solving issues such as vanishing/exploding gradients but an often-overlooked aspect is their impact on the final trained distributions of each layer. We present an in-depth, fine-grained ablation study of the effect of different weights initializations on the final distributions of weights and activations of different CNN architectures. The fine-grained, layerwise analysis enables us to gain deep insights on how initial weights distributions will affect final accuracy and quantized behaviour. To our best knowledge, we are the first to perform such a low-level, in-depth quantitative analysis of weights initialization and its effect on quantized behaviour.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".