Activation-Energy Pruning for Spiking Neural Networks: Unsupervised Personalization via Spike-Count Saliency
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Activation-energy pruning -- removing weights whose product of magnitude and cumulative pre-synaptic spike count falls below a threshold -- was established as an effective unsupervised personalization strategy for conventional deep neural networks~citepBINGHAM2025101242. This paper asks what happens when the same criterion is applied to spiking neural networks (SNNs), where activation energy is not merely a useful heuristic but a literal physical quantity proportional to the metabolic cost of each synapse. The answer is surprising on three counts. First, gradient-based pruning methods that perform competitively on conventional networks (SNIP, GraSP, magnitude pruning) consistently underperform on SNNs, collapsing to near-chance accuracy by σ = 0.2 sparsity across all tested architectures and datasets. We trace this to a systematic incompatibility between surrogate-gradient saliency estimation and the binary spike-train representation, though we cannot rule out that alternative surrogate choices or hyperparameter settings might partially mitigate the effect. Second, activation-energy pruning applied to a neuromorphic benchmark improves over the source model at high sparsity (98.4 ± 0.4% vs. 97.2 ± 0.7% at σ = 0.8 on N-MNIST), a phenomenon with no counterpart in the conventional network setting. We interpret this result as consistent with experience-dependent cortical specialisation: removing connections active only for non-target classes may reduce cross-class interference and produce a cleaner target representation, though we note this is an interpretive analogy rather than a mechanistic demonstration.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Aug 2026.
Builds on
21 of 47 references.
References · 21
- 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,267
- 2018The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Finding Sparse, Trainable Neural Networkscited by 2,250
- 2015Learning both Weights and Connections for Efficient Neural Networkscited by 1,998
- 2017Improved Regularization of Convolutional Neural Networks with Cutoutcited by 1,623
- 2016Pruning Filters for Efficient ConvNetscited by 1,129
- 2020Meta-Learning in Neural Networks: A Surveycited by 944
- 2018SNIP: Single-shot Network Pruning based on Connection Sensitivitycited by 802
- 2020Picking Winning Tickets Before Training by Preserving Gradient Flowcited by 467
- 2020Improving robustness against common corruptions by covariate shift adaptationcited by 427
- 2018A Survey of Unsupervised Deep Domain Adaptationcited by 361
- 2015Converting Static Image Datasets to Spiking Neuromorphic Datasets Using Saccadescited by 308
- 2022Spikformer: When Spiking Neural Network Meets Transformercited by 263
9 more
- 2020Evaluating Prediction-Time Batch Normalization for Robustness under Covariate Shiftcited by 235
- 2022Temporal Efficient Training of Spiking Neural Network via Gradient Re-weightingcited by 192
- 2020Pruning Neural Networks at Initialization: Why are We Missing the Mark?cited by 181
- 2020Salvaging Federated Learning by Local Adaptationcited by 142
- 2021Pruning of Deep Spiking Neural Networks through Gradient Rewiringcited by 41
- 2022Exploring Lottery Ticket Hypothesis in Spiking Neural Networkscited by 25
- 2023Unleashing the Potential of Spiking Neural Networks by Dynamic Confidencecited by 14
- 2026Bonsai: A Framework for Convolutional Neural Network Acceleration Using Criterion-Based Pruningcited by 3
- 2026Fine-Pruning: A Biologically Inspired Algorithm for Personalization of Machine Learning Modelscited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.