Frozen Overparameterization: A Double Descent Perspective on Transfer Learning of Deep Neural Networks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We study the generalization behavior of transfer learning of deep neural networks (DNNs). We adopt the overparameterization perspective -- featuring interpolation of the training data (i.e., approximately zero train error) and the double descent phenomenon -- to explain the delicate effect of the transfer learning setting on generalization performance. We study how the generalization behavior of transfer learning is affected by the dataset size in the source and target tasks, the number of transferred layers that are kept frozen in the target DNN training, and the similarity between the source and target tasks. We show that the test error evolution during the target DNN training has a more significant double descent effect when the target training dataset is sufficiently large. In addition, a larger source training dataset can yield a slower target DNN training. Moreover, we demonstrate that the number of frozen layers can determine whether the transfer learning is effectively underparameterized or overparameterized and, in turn, this may induce a freezing-wise double descent phenomenon that determines the relative success or failure of learning. Also, we show that the double descent phenomenon may make a transfer from a less related source task better than a transfer from a more related source task. We establish our results using image classification experiments with the ResNet, DenseNet and the vision transformer (ViT) architectures.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Nov 2022.
Builds on
19 of 25 references.
References · 19
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2016Densely Connected Convolutional Networkscited by 6,691
- 2016Understanding deep learning requires rethinking generalizationcited by 1,657
- 2014How transferable are features in deep neural networks?cited by 1,216
- 2018Reconciling modern machine learning practice and the bias-variance trade-offcited by 919
- 2021Do Vision Transformers See Like Convolutional Neural Networks?cited by 671
- 2019Deep Double Descent: Where Bigger Models and More Data Hurtcited by 667
- 2016Deep Transfer Learning with Joint Adaptation Networkscited by 609
- 2018Do Better ImageNet Models Transfer Better?cited by 560
- 2019Generalizing from a Few Examples: A Survey on Few-Shot Learningcited by 462
- 2019Transfusion: Understanding Transfer Learning for Medical Imagingcited by 366
- 2020How Well Do Self-Supervised Models Transfer?cited by 213
7 more
- 2016Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learningcited by 209
- 2022Can Neural Nets Learn the Same Model Twice? Investigating Reproducibility and Double Descent from the Decision Boundary Perspectivecited by 57
- 2021Factors of Influence for Transfer Learning across Diverse Appearance Domains and Task Typescited by 54
- 2021A Farewell to the Bias-Variance Tradeoff? An Overview of the Theory of Overparameterized Machine Learningcited by 54
- 2021Probing transfer learning with a model of synthetic correlated datasetscited by 24
- 2020Double Double Descent: On Generalization Errors in Transfer Learning between Linear Regression Taskscited by 15
- 2021The Common Intuition to Transfer Learning Can Win or Lose: Case Studies for Linear Regressioncited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.
1 paper.
- 2024On Catastrophic Inheritance of Large Foundation Modelscited by 15
- 2024On Catastrophic Inheritance of Large Foundation Models2 Feb 2024