Attention Based Pruning for Shift Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many application domains such as computer vision, Convolutional Layers (CLs) are key to the accuracy of deep learning methods. However, it is often required to assemble a large number of CLs, each containing thousands of parameters, in order to reach state-of-the-art accuracy, thus resulting in complex and demanding systems that are poorly fitted to resource-limited devices. Recently, methods have been proposed to replace the generic convolution operator by the combination of a shift operation and a simpler 1×1 convolution. The resulting block, called Shift Layer (SL), is an efficient alternative to CLs in the sense it allows to reach similar accuracies on various tasks with faster computations and fewer parameters. In this contribution, we introduce Shift Attention Layers (SALs), which extend SLs by using an attention mechanism that learns which shifts are the best at the same time the network function is trained. We demonstrate SALs are able to outperform vanilla SLs (and CLs) on various object recognition benchmarks while significantly reducing the number of float operations and parameters for the inference.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".