# Lottery Tickets Are Not Deployment Tickets

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.27031 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.27031/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 41 of its 61 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 29 Jul 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 41)

- [Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1512.03385/) (2015)
- [An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.11929/) (2020)
- [On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.04599/) (2017)
- [Wide Residual Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1605.07146/) (2016)
- [Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1903.12261/) (2019)
- [A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02136/) (2016)
- [Deep Compression: Compressing Deep Neural Networks with Pruning, Trained Quantization and Huffman Coding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1510.00149/) (2015)
- [The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Finding Sparse, Trainable Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.03635/) (2018)
- [Learning both Weights and Connections for Efficient Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1506.02626/) (2015)
- [Similarity of Neural Network Representations Revisited](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.00414/) (2019)
- [Fine-Grained Visual Classification of Aircraft](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1306.5151/) (2013)
- [Can You Trust Your Model's Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shift](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.02530/) (2019)
- [Membership Inference Attacks From First Principles](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.03570/) (2021)
- [Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.08500/) (2017)
- [SNIP: Single-shot Network Pruning based on Connection Sensitivity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.02340/) (2018)
- [Linear Mode Connectivity and the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.05671/) (2019)
- [To prune, or not to prune: exploring the efficacy of pruning for model compression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1710.01878/) (2017)
- [Rethinking the Value of Network Pruning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.05270/) (2018)
- [What is the State of Neural Network Pruning?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.03033/) (2020)
- [Rigging the Lottery: Making All Tickets Winners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.11134/) (2019)
- [Pruning neural networks without any data by iteratively conserving synaptic flow](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.05467/) (2020)
- [The State of Sparsity in Deep Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.09574/) (2019)
- [Picking Winning Tickets Before Training by Preserving Gradient Flow](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.07376/) (2020)
- [Comparing Rewinding and Fine-tuning in Neural Network Pruning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.02389/) (2020)
- [Pruning Neural Networks at Initialization: Why are We Missing the Mark?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.08576/) (2020)
- [Predictive Multiplicity in Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.06677/) (2019)
- [One ticket to win them all: generalizing lottery ticket initializations across datasets and optimizers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.02773/) (2019)
- [The Lottery Tickets Hypothesis for Supervised and Self-supervised Pre-training in Computer Vision Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.06908/) (2020)
- [Lost in Pruning: The Effects of Pruning Neural Networks beyond Test Accuracy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03014/) (2021)
- [A Winning Hand: Compressing Deep Networks Can Improve Out-Of-Distribution Robustness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.09129/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Reports on how sparsification, compression, and lottery tickets change model behavior have been mixed in the prior literature, with beneficial effects observed in some studies and adverse effects in others. Moreover, prior work has not considered actual deployment conditions, where decision logic is already fixed for the incumbent. To assess these mixed findings from a practical standpoint, we study the production-replacement question at the deployment level, namely whether an accuracy-matched lottery ticket or another sparse challenger can replace an incumbent dense model without reconfiguring downstream decision logic. We therefore audit a broad, protocol-specific panel of deployment-relevant behaviors spanning calibration, OOD response, class-level reliability, representations, and downstream policy decisions, and summarize clean-accuracy-excluded deviations with a behavioral-compatibility distance. Across extensive experiments, sparse candidates repeatedly recover dense-reference accuracy yet remain behaviorally different; in several study-band-matched settings, LTs also show lower corruption accuracy. In small-gap settings with fixed-threshold policy diagnostics, lottery-ticket replacement changes 7% to 10% of accept--review decisions. This churn creates precisely the burden that drop-in replacement is meant to avoid: reconfiguring and revalidating downstream decision logic. These findings establish the limits of clean-accuracy certification: Establishing compatibility with a fixed incumbent is distinct from attributing churn uniquely to sparsity or treating every measured deviation as harmful. Our theory explains the routing result: Even exact pointwise top-1 agreement cannot bound fixed-threshold decision changes, and small confidence shifts near the operating boundary can generate first-order routing churn.