Improving Zero-Shot Neural Architecture Search with Parameters Scoring
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
The exceptional success of deep learning comes at the cost of long training sessions, and a slow iterative process of proposing new architectures that have to be hand-engineered through years of experience. Neural Architecture Search (NAS) is the line of research that tries to automatically design architectures with better performances at a given task. The performance of a network in a task can be predicted by a score, even before the network is trained: this is referred to as zero-shot NAS. However, the existing score remains unreliable for architectures with high accuracy. We develop in this direction by exploring different related scores. We study their time efficiency and we improve on their dependence with the final accuracy, especially for high values of the score. We propose a monotonicity metric to evaluate the adequate relative scoring of the architectures, as a way to avoid imposing a linearity assumption too early. We find that our use of noise improves the score, but a more substantial improvement comes when the evaluation of the score is done in the parameter space. We hope this effort will help clarify promising directions to speed up automatic discovery of good neural architectures without training.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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