Quantifying lottery tickets under label noise: accuracy, calibration, and complexity
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Pruning deep neural networks is a widely used strategy to alleviate the computational burden in machine learning. Overwhelming empirical evidence suggests that pruned models retain very high accuracy even with a tiny fraction of parameters. However, relatively little work has gone into characterising the small pruned networks obtained, beyond a measure of their accuracy. In this paper, we use the sparse double descent approach to identify univocally and characterise pruned models associated with classification tasks. We observe empirically that, for a given task, iterative magnitude pruning (IMP) tends to converge to networks of comparable sizes even when starting from full networks with sizes ranging over orders of magnitude. We analyse the best pruned models in a controlled experimental setup and show that their number of parameters reflects task difficulty and that they are much better than full networks at capturing the true conditional probability distribution of the labels. On real data, we similarly observe that pruned models are less prone to overconfident predictions. Our results suggest that pruned models obtained via IMP not only have advantageous computational properties but also provide a better representation of uncertainty in learning.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 41 of its 63 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Jun 2023.
Builds on
41 of 63 references.
References · 41
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2017Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithmscited by 4,349
- 2018The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Finding Sparse, Trainable Neural Networkscited by 2,262
- 2015Learning both Weights and Connections for Efficient Neural Networkscited by 2,031
- 2017A Closer Look at Memorization in Deep Networkscited by 942
- 2018Reconciling modern machine learning practice and the bias-variance trade-offcited by 927
- 2019Deep Double Descent: Where Bigger Models and More Data Hurtcited by 672
- 2019Linear Mode Connectivity and the Lottery Ticket Hypothesiscited by 637
- 2020What is the State of Neural Network Pruning?cited by 583
- 2021Sparsity in Deep Learning: Pruning and growth for efficient inference and training in neural networkscited by 527
- 2019Surprises in High-Dimensional Ridgeless Least Squares Interpolationcited by 513
29 more
- 2019The State of Sparsity in Deep Neural Networkscited by 476
- 2019The generalization error of random features regression: Precise asymptotics and double descent curvecited by 413
- 2021Pervasive Label Errors in Test Sets Destabilize Machine Learning Benchmarkscited by 395
- 2018Measuring the Intrinsic Dimension of Objective Landscapescited by 370
- 2021The Intrinsic Dimension of Images and Its Impact on Learningcited by 315
- 2017High-dimensional dynamics of generalization error in neural networkscited by 241
- 2020Comparing Rewinding and Fine-tuning in Neural Network Pruningcited by 240
- 2020Proving the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Pruning is All You Needcited by 201
- 2019Two models of double descent for weak featurescited by 195
- 2018Towards Understanding the Role of Over-Parametrization in Generalization of Neural Networkscited by 142
- 2020Double Trouble in Double Descent : Bias and Variance(s) in the Lazy Regimecited by 95
- 2020Optimal Lottery Tickets via SubsetSum: Logarithmic Over-Parameterization is Sufficientcited by 81
- 2020Logarithmic Pruning is All You Needcited by 71
- 2021Classifying high-dimensional Gaussian mixtures: Where kernel methods fail and neural networks succeedcited by 69
- 2018A jamming transition from under- to over-parametrization affects loss landscape and generalizationcited by 67
- 2020Triple descent and the two kinds of overfitting: Where & why do they appear?cited by 65
- 2020A Brief Prehistory of Double Descentcited by 44
- 2022Unmasking the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: What's Encoded in a Winning Ticket's Mask?cited by 38
- 2022Pruning's Effect on Generalization Through the Lens of Training and Regularizationcited by 31
- 2020What causes the test error? Going beyond bias-variance via ANOVAcited by 28
- 2022Sparse Double Descent: Where Network Pruning Aggravates Overfittingcited by 26
- 2022Most Activation Functions Can Win the Lottery Without Excessive Depthcited by 21
- 2020On Iterative Neural Network Pruning, Reinitialization, and the Similarity of Maskscited by 13
- 2021Robustness to Pruning Predicts Generalization in Deep Neural Networkscited by 10
- 2022Analyzing Lottery Ticket Hypothesis from PAC-Bayesian Theory Perspectivecited by 9
- 2020Calibrate and Prune: Improving Reliability of Lottery Tickets Through Prediction Calibrationcited by 6
- 2023Calibrating the Rigged Lottery: Making All Tickets Reliablecited by 4
- 2021Sifting out the features by pruning: Are convolutional networks the winning lottery ticket of fully connected ones?cited by 3
- 2022The Effect of Data Dimensionality on Neural Network Prunabilitycited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 1.
2 papers.