MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417089364 · doi:10.1109/iccv51701.2025.00301

Sparsity Outperforms Low-Rank Projections in Few-Shot Adaptation

2025· article· en· W4417089364 on OpenAlexafffund
Nairouz Mrabah, Nicolas Richet, Ismail Ben Ayed, Éric Granger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureBell (Canada)
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOverfittingPruningHyperparameterKey (lock)Selection (genetic algorithm)Adaptation (eye)RandomnessGeneralization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adapting Vision-Language Models (VLMs) to new domains with few labeled samples remains a significant challenge due to severe overfitting and computational constraints. State-of-the-art solutions, such as low-rank reparameterization, mitigate these issues but often struggle with generalization and require extensive hyperparameter tuning. In this paper, a novel Sparse Optimization (SO) framework is proposed. Unlike low-rank approaches that typically constrain updates to a fixed subspace, our SO method leverages high sparsity to dynamically adjust very few parameters. We introduce two key paradigms. First, we advocate for \textit{local sparsity and global density}, which updates a minimal subset of parameters per iteration while maintaining overall model expressiveness. As a second paradigm, we advocate for \textit{local randomness and global importance}, which sparsifies the gradient using random selection while pruning the first moment based on importance. This combination significantly mitigates overfitting and ensures stable adaptation in low-data regimes. Extensive experiments on 11 diverse datasets show that SO achieves state-of-the-art few-shot adaptation performance while reducing memory overhead.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningFrench-language works237,207