Sparsity Outperforms Low-Rank Projections in Few-Shot Adaptation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".