Linearly Replaceable Filters for Deep Network Channel Pruning
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
Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have achieved remarkable results; however, despite the development of deep learning, practical user applications are fairly limited because heavy networks can be used solely with the latest hardware and software supports. Therefore, network pruning is gaining attention for general applications in various fields. This paper proposes a novel channel pruning method, Linearly Replaceable Filter (LRF), which suggests that a filter that can be approximated by the linear combination of other filters is replaceable. Moreover, an additional method called Weights Compensation is proposed to support the LRF method. This is a technique that effectively reduces the output difference caused by removing filters via direct weight modification. Through various experiments, we have confirmed that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance in several benchmarks. In particular, on ImageNet, LRF-60 reduces approximately 56% of FLOPs on ResNet-50 without top-5 accuracy drop. Further, through extensive analyses, we proved the effectiveness of our approaches.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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