Learning Fine-grained Parameter Sharing via Sparse Tensor Decomposition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large neural networks achieve state-of-the-art performance on many tasks, yet their sheer size hinders deployment on resource-constrained devices. Among existing compression approaches, cross-layer parameter sharing remains relatively unexplored for transformer models. In this paper, we introduce Fine-grained Parameter Sharing (FiPS), a unified framework for compressing transformer Multi-Layer Perceptrons (MLPs) that combines cross-block parameter sharing, low-rank factorization, and sparsity in a single optimization. FiPS concatenates MLP weight matrices across a group of transformer blocks and factorizes them into a shared basis and sparse, layer-specific projection matrices. Both factors are initialized via singular value decomposition (SVD) and jointly optimized by block-wise reconstruction error minimization. FiPS compresses Vision Transformers (ViTs) by up to 33% with less than 1% top-1 accuracy loss on ImageNet-1k, and by up to 57% when combined with fine-tuning. It also compresses Large Language Models (LLMs) by up to 20% while outperforming existing SVD-based methods in perplexity and downstream benchmarks at matched compression. Combined with Quantization-Aware Training (QAT), 3-bit FiPS on Gemma-2-2B achieves lower perplexity than 2-bit QAT alone while matching the same 8x compression. These results establish fine-grained parameter sharing as a practical and effective approach for transformer MLP compression.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".