Winning the Lottery by Preserving Network Training Dynamics with Concrete Ticket Search
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis asserts the existence of highly sparse, trainable subnetworks ('winning tickets') within dense, randomly initialized neural networks. However, state-of-the-art methods of drawing these tickets, like Lottery Ticket Rewinding (LTR), are computationally prohibitive, while more efficient saliency-based Pruning-at-Initialization (PaI) techniques suffer from a significant accuracy-sparsity trade-off and fail basic sanity checks. In this work, we argue that PaI's reliance on first-order saliency metrics, which ignore inter-weight dependencies, contributes substantially to this performance gap, especially in the sparse regime. To address this, we introduce Concrete Ticket Search (CTS), an algorithm that frames subnetwork discovery as a holistic combinatorial optimization problem. By leveraging a Concrete relaxation of the discrete search space and a novel gradient balancing scheme (GRADBALANCE) to control sparsity, CTS efficiently identifies high-performing subnetworks near initialization without requiring sensitive hyperparameter tuning. Motivated by recent works on lottery ticket training dynamics, we further propose a knowledge distillation-inspired family of pruning objectives, finding that minimizing the reverse Kullback-Leibler divergence between sparse and dense network outputs (CTS-KL) is particularly effective. Experiments on varying image classification tasks show that CTS produces subnetworks that robustly pass sanity checks and achieve accuracy comparable to or exceeding LTR, while requiring only a small fraction of the computation. For example, on ResNet-20 on CIFAR10, it reaches 99.3% sparsity with 74.0% accuracy in 7.9 minutes, while LTR attains the same sparsity with 68.3% accuracy in 95.2 minutes. CTS's subnetworks outperform saliency-based methods across all sparsities, but its advantage over LTR is most pronounced in the highly sparse regime.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 37 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Dec 2025.
Builds on
37 of 49 references.
References · 37
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,267
- 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,441
- 2018Neural Tangent Kernel: Convergence and Generalization in Neural Networkscited by 2,597
- 2015Deep Compression: Compressing Deep Neural Networks with Pruning, Trained Quantization and Huffman Codingcited by 2,291
- 2018The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Finding Sparse, Trainable Neural Networkscited by 2,250
- 2014FitNets: Hints for Thin Deep Netscited by 1,619
- 2016The Concrete Distribution: A Continuous Relaxation of Discrete Random Variablescited by 1,135
- 2017GradNorm: Gradient Normalization for Adaptive Loss Balancing in Deep Multitask Networkscited by 816
- 2018SNIP: Single-shot Network Pruning based on Connection Sensitivitycited by 802
- 2019Linear Mode Connectivity and the Lottery Ticket Hypothesiscited by 627
- 2017Learning Sparse Neural Networks through L0 Regularizationcited by 571
25 more
- 2020Pruning neural networks without any data by iteratively conserving synaptic flowcited by 475
- 2020Picking Winning Tickets Before Training by Preserving Gradient Flowcited by 467
- 2019An Investigation into Neural Net Optimization via Hessian Eigenvalue Densitycited by 289
- 2018On the Optimization of Deep Networks: Implicit Acceleration by Overparameterizationcited by 280
- 2020Comparing Rewinding and Fine-tuning in Neural Network Pruningcited by 238
- 2019What's Hidden in a Randomly Weighted Neural Network?cited by 236
- 2019Deconstructing Lottery Tickets: Zeros, Signs, and the Supermaskcited by 206
- 2020Pruning Neural Networks at Initialization: Why are We Missing the Mark?cited by 181
- 2020The Early Phase of Neural Network Trainingcited by 114
- 2017Backpropagation through the Void: Optimizing control variates for black-box gradient estimationcited by 104
- 2017REBAR: Low-variance, unbiased gradient estimates for discrete latent variable modelscited by 78
- 2020Gradient Flow in Sparse Neural Networks and How Lottery Tickets Wincited by 77
- 2020Sanity-Checking Pruning Methods: Random Tickets can Win the Jackpotcited by 66
- 2024Rethinking Kullback-Leibler Divergence in Knowledge Distillation for Large Language Modelscited by 60
- 2013Estimating or Propagating Gradients Through Stochastic Neuronscited by 54
- 2023Fast as CHITA: Neural Network Pruning with Combinatorial Optimizationcited by 40
- 2022Rare Gems: Finding Lottery Tickets at Initializationcited by 34
- 2022Self-Knowledge Distillation via Dropoutcited by 18
- 2024Masks, Signs, And Learning Rate Rewindingcited by 15
- 2023Critical Learning Periods Emerge Even in Deep Linear Networkscited by 13
- 2024Finding Lottery Tickets in Vision Models via Data-driven Spectral Foresight Pruningcited by 10
- 2024Preserving Deep Representations In One-Shot Pruning: A Hessian-Free Second-Order Optimization Frameworkcited by 10
- 2025The Butterfly Effect: Neural Network Training Trajectories Are Highly Sensitive to Initial Conditionscited by 9
- 2024EPSD: Early Pruning with Self-Distillation for Efficient Model Compressioncited by 6
- 2023Enhancing Neural Training via a Correlated Dynamics Modelcited by 5
Built on by
Not cited yet.