Evolving transferable neural pruning functions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Structural design of neural networks is crucial for the success of deep learning. While most prior works in evolutionary learning aim at directly searching the structure of a network, few attempts have been made on another promising track, channel pruning, which recently has made major headway in designing efficient deep learning models. In fact, prior pruning methods adopt human-made pruning functions to score a channel's importance for channel pruning, which requires domain knowledge and could be sub-optimal. To this end, we pioneer the use of genetic programming (GP) to discover strong pruning metrics automatically. Specifically, we craft a novel design space to express high-quality and transferable pruning functions, which ensures an end-to-end evolution process where no manual modification is needed on the evolved functions for their transferability after evolution. Unlike prior methods, our approach can provide both compact pruned networks for efficient inference and novel closed-form pruning metrics which are mathematically explainable and thus generalizable to different pruning tasks. While the evolution is conducted on small datasets, our functions shows promising results when applied to more challenging datasets, different from those used in the evolution process. For example, on ILSVRC-2012, an evolved function achieves state-of-the-art pruning 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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".