Improved knowledge distillation by utilizing backward pass knowledge in neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge distillation (KD) is one of the prominent techniques for model compression. In this method, the knowledge of a large network (teacher) is distilled into a model (student) with usually significantly fewer parameters. KD tries to better-match the output of the student model to that of the teacher model based on the knowledge extracts from the forward pass of the teacher network. Although conventional KD is effective for matching the two networks over the given data points, there is no guarantee that these models would match in other areas for which we do not have enough training samples. In this work, we address that problem by generating new auxiliary training samples based on extracting knowledge from the backward pass of the teacher in the areas where the student diverges greatly from the teacher. We compute the difference between the teacher and the student and generate new data samples that maximize the divergence. This is done by perturbing data samples in the direction of the gradient of the difference between the student and the teacher. Augmenting the training set by adding this auxiliary improves the performance of KD significantly and leads to a closer match between the student and the teacher. Using this approach, when data samples come from a discrete domain, such as applications of natural language processing (NLP) and language understanding, is not trivial. However, we show how this technique can be used successfully in such applications. We evaluated the performance of our method on various tasks in computer vision and NLP domains and got promising results.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".