mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Cyclic Sparse Training: Is it Enough?

arXiv 2406.02773 ↗First posted 4 Jun 2024cs.LG cs.CVcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The success of iterative pruning methods in achieving state-of-the-art sparse networks has largely been attributed to improved mask identification and an implicit regularization induced by pruning. We challenge this hypothesis and instead posit that their repeated cyclic training schedules enable improved optimization. To verify this, we show that pruning at initialization is significantly boosted by repeated cyclic training, even outperforming standard iterative pruning methods. The dominant mechanism how this is achieved, as we conjecture, can be attributed to a better exploration of the loss landscape leading to a lower training loss. However, at high sparsity, repeated cyclic training alone is not enough for competitive performance. A strong coupling between learnt parameter initialization and mask seems to be required. Standard methods obtain this coupling via expensive pruning-training iterations, starting from a dense network. To achieve this with sparse training instead, we propose SCULPT-ing, i.e., repeated cyclic training of any sparse mask followed by a single pruning step to couple the parameters and the mask, which is able to match the performance of state-of-the-art iterative pruning methods in the high sparsity regime at reduced computational cost.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 45 of its 60 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Jun 2024.

Builds on

45 of 60 references.

References · 45

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2023Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4cited by 2,579
  3. 2018The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Finding Sparse, Trainable Neural Networkscited by 2,250
  4. 2015Learning both Weights and Connections for Efficient Neural Networkscited by 1,998
  5. 2016On Large-Batch Training for Deep Learning: Generalization Gap and Sharp Minimacited by 1,337
  6. 2018SNIP: Single-shot Network Pruning based on Connection Sensitivitycited by 802
  7. 2018Gradient Descent Provably Optimizes Over-parameterized Neural Networkscited by 655
  8. 2015Cyclical Learning Rates for Training Neural Networkscited by 627
  9. 2017Computing Nonvacuous Generalization Bounds for Deep (Stochastic) Neural Networks with Many More Parameters than Training Datacited by 527
  10. 2019Rigging the Lottery: Making All Tickets Winnerscited by 491
  11. 2020Pruning neural networks without any data by iteratively conserving synaptic flowcited by 475
  12. 2020Picking Winning Tickets Before Training by Preserving Gradient Flowcited by 467
33 more
  1. 2017Scalable Training of Artificial Neural Networks with Adaptive Sparse Connectivity inspired by Network Sciencecited by 325
  2. 2019PyHessian: Neural Networks Through the Lens of the Hessiancited by 291
  3. 2020The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis for Pre-trained BERT Networkscited by 275
  4. 2021Sustainable AI: Environmental Implications, Challenges and Opportunitiescited by 242
  5. 2020Comparing Rewinding and Fine-tuning in Neural Network Pruningcited by 238
  6. 2019Deconstructing Lottery Tickets: Zeros, Signs, and the Supermaskcited by 206
  7. 2020Proving the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Pruning is All You Needcited by 200
  8. 2023Power Hungry Processing: Watts Driving the Cost of AI Deployment?cited by 186
  9. 2020Pruning Neural Networks at Initialization: Why are We Missing the Mark?cited by 181
  10. 2019Drawing Early-Bird Tickets: Towards More Efficient Training of Deep Networkscited by 160
  11. 2020Training BatchNorm and Only BatchNorm: On the Expressive Power of Random Features in CNNscited by 103
  12. 2019One ticket to win them all: generalizing lottery ticket initializations across datasets and optimizerscited by 102
  13. 2022The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Random Pruning: Return of the Most Naive Baseline for Sparse Trainingcited by 85
  14. 2020Optimal Lottery Tickets via SubsetSum: Logarithmic Over-Parameterization is Sufficientcited by 81
  15. 2020Logarithmic Pruning is All You Needcited by 71
  16. 2020Sanity-Checking Pruning Methods: Random Tickets can Win the Jackpotcited by 66
  17. 2021Introduction to Neural Network Verificationcited by 63
  18. 2021AC/DC: Alternating Compressed/DeCompressed Training of Deep Neural Networkscited by 58
  19. 2021Sanity Checks for Lottery Tickets: Does Your Winning Ticket Really Win the Jackpot?cited by 52
  20. 2023FFCV: Accelerating Training by Removing Data Bottleneckscited by 49
  21. 2023Optimal Linear Decay Learning Rate Schedules and Further Refinementscited by 41
  22. 2022Unmasking the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: What's Encoded in a Winning Ticket's Mask?cited by 38
  23. 2022Pruning's Effect on Generalization Through the Lens of Training and Regularizationcited by 31
  24. 2021On the Existence of Universal Lottery Ticketscited by 30
  25. 2022Why Random Pruning Is All We Need to Start Sparsecited by 26
  26. 2022Most Activation Functions Can Win the Lottery Without Excessive Depthcited by 21
  27. 2022A General Framework For Proving The Equivariant Strong Lottery Ticket Hypothesiscited by 19
  28. 2020PHEW: Constructing Sparse Networks that Learn Fast and Generalize Well without Training Datacited by 17
  29. 2022Convolutional and Residual Networks Provably Contain Lottery Ticketscited by 16
  30. 2024Masks, Signs, And Learning Rate Rewindingcited by 15
  31. 2021Plant 'n' Seek: Can You Find the Winning Ticket?cited by 13
  32. 2023The Expressive Power of Tuning Only the Normalization Layerscited by 13
  33. 2023Accurate Neural Network Pruning Requires Rethinking Sparse Optimizationcited by 10

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.

1 paper.