mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Understanding Sparse Neural Networks from their Topology via Multipartite Graph Representations

arXiv 2305.16886 ↗First posted 26 May 2023cs.LG cs.AIcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Pruning-at-Initialization (PaI) algorithms provide Sparse Neural Networks (SNNs) which are computationally more efficient than their dense counterparts, and try to avoid performance degradation. While much emphasis has been directed towards how to prune, we still do not know what topological metrics of the SNNs characterize good performance. From prior work, we have layer-wise topological metrics by which SNN performance can be predicted: the Ramanujan-based metrics. To exploit these metrics, proper ways to represent network layers via Graph Encodings (GEs) are needed, with Bipartite Graph Encodings (BGEs) being the de-facto standard at the current stage. Nevertheless, existing BGEs neglect the impact of the inputs, and do not characterize the SNN in an end-to-end manner. Additionally, thanks to a thorough study of the Ramanujan-based metrics, we discover that they are only as good as the layer-wise density as performance predictors, when paired with BGEs. To close both gaps, we design a comprehensive topological analysis for SNNs with both linear and convolutional layers, via (i) a new input-aware Multipartite Graph Encoding (MGE) for SNNs and (ii) the design of new end-to-end topological metrics over the MGE. With these novelties, we show the following: (a) The proposed MGE allows to extract topological metrics that are much better predictors of the accuracy drop than metrics computed from current input-agnostic BGEs; (b) Which metrics are important at different sparsity levels and for different architectures; (c) A mixture of our topological metrics can rank PaI algorithms more effectively than Ramanujan-based metrics. The codebase is publicly available at https://github.com/eliacunegatti/mge-snn.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 39 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 May 2023.

Builds on

39 of 59 references.

References · 39

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  2. 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,364
  3. 2015Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shiftcited by 7,005
  4. 2015Delving Deep into Rectifiers: Surpassing Human-Level Performance on ImageNet Classificationcited by 3,611
  5. 2018The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Finding Sparse, Trainable Neural Networkscited by 2,262
  6. 2018SNIP: Single-shot Network Pruning based on Connection Sensitivitycited by 812
  7. 2017To prune, or not to prune: exploring the efficacy of pruning for model compressioncited by 603
  8. 2019Rigging the Lottery: Making All Tickets Winnerscited by 495
  9. 2020Pruning neural networks without any data by iteratively conserving synaptic flowcited by 479
  10. 2020Picking Winning Tickets Before Training by Preserving Gradient Flowcited by 471
  11. 2017A Downsampled Variant of ImageNet as an Alternative to the CIFAR datasetscited by 377
  12. 2017Scalable Training of Artificial Neural Networks with Adaptive Sparse Connectivity inspired by Network Sciencecited by 328
27 more
  1. 2019What's Hidden in a Randomly Weighted Neural Network?cited by 237
  2. 2019Sparse Networks from Scratch: Faster Training without Losing Performancecited by 213
  3. 2019Deconstructing Lottery Tickets: Zeros, Signs, and the Supermaskcited by 207
  4. 2020Proving the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Pruning is All You Needcited by 201
  5. 2019Parameter Efficient Training of Deep Convolutional Neural Networks by Dynamic Sparse Reparameterizationcited by 189
  6. 2020Pruning Neural Networks at Initialization: Why are We Missing the Mark?cited by 182
  7. 2021Do We Actually Need Dense Over-Parameterization? In-Time Over-Parameterization in Sparse Trainingcited by 110
  8. 2022The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Random Pruning: Return of the Most Naive Baseline for Sparse Trainingcited by 85
  9. 2020Gradient Flow in Sparse Neural Networks and How Lottery Tickets Wincited by 77
  10. 2018Neural Persistence: A Complexity Measure for Deep Neural Networks Using Algebraic Topologycited by 73
  11. 2020Graph Structure of Neural Networkscited by 68
  12. 2020Sanity-Checking Pruning Methods: Random Tickets can Win the Jackpotcited by 66
  13. 2020Progressive Skeletonization: Trimming more fat from a network at initializationcited by 64
  14. 2019The Difficulty of Training Sparse Neural Networkscited by 62
  15. 2022Prospect Pruning: Finding Trainable Weights at Initialization using Meta-Gradientscited by 34
  16. 2022Rare Gems: Finding Lottery Tickets at Initializationcited by 34
  17. 2023NTK-SAP: Improving neural network pruning by aligning training dynamicscited by 30
  18. 2022Why Random Pruning Is All We Need to Start Sparsecited by 26
  19. 2021Clusterability in Neural Networkscited by 24
  20. 2017Deep Expander Networks: Efficient Deep Networks from Graph Theorycited by 23
  21. 2020Topological Insights into Sparse Neural Networkscited by 22
  22. 2020PHEW: Constructing Sparse Networks that Learn Fast and Generalize Well without Training Datacited by 17
  23. 2021Connectivity Matters: Neural Network Pruning Through the Lens of Effective Sparsitycited by 14
  24. 2019Structural Analysis of Sparse Neural Networkscited by 8
  25. 2020Hcore-Init: Neural Network Initialization based on Graph Degeneracycited by 2
  26. 2021Experiments on Properties of Hidden Structures of Sparse Neural Networkscited by 2
  27. 2021Leveraging the Graph Structure of Neural Network Training Dynamicscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 1.

2 papers.