Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Lottery Ticket Preserves Weight Correlation: Is It Desirable or Not?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2102.11068 v2 pith:R63MKXTM submitted 2021-02-19 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CV

Lottery Ticket Preserves Weight Correlation: Is It Desirable or Not?

classification cs.LG cs.AIcs.CV
keywords ticketwinninglotteryoriginalpropertytrainingcorrelationdeep
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

In deep model compression, the recent finding "Lottery Ticket Hypothesis" (LTH) (Frankle & Carbin, 2018) pointed out that there could exist a winning ticket (i.e., a properly pruned sub-network together with original weight initialization) that can achieve competitive performance than the original dense network. However, it is not easy to observe such winning property in many scenarios, where for example, a relatively large learning rate is used even if it benefits training the original dense model. In this work, we investigate the underlying condition and rationale behind the winning property, and find that the underlying reason is largely attributed to the correlation between initialized weights and final-trained weights when the learning rate is not sufficiently large. Thus, the existence of winning property is correlated with an insufficient DNN pretraining, and is unlikely to occur for a well-trained DNN. To overcome this limitation, we propose the "pruning & fine-tuning" method that consistently outperforms lottery ticket sparse training under the same pruning algorithm and the same total training epochs. Extensive experiments over multiple deep models (VGG, ResNet, MobileNet-v2) on different datasets have been conducted to justify our proposals.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.