Pruning Convolutional Neural Networks with Self-Supervision

Convolutional neural networks trained without supervision come close to matching performance with supervised pre-training, but sometimes at the cost of an even higher number of parameters. Extracting subnetworks from these large unsupervised convnets with preserved performance is of particular interest to make them less computationally intensive. Typical pruning methods operate during training on a task while trying to maintain the performance of the pruned network on the same task. However, in self-supervised feature learning, the training objective is agnostic on the representation transferability to downstream tasks. Thus, preserving performance for this objective does not ensure that the pruned subnetwork remains effective for solving downstream tasks. In this work, we investigate the use of standard pruning methods, developed primarily for supervised learning, for networks trained without labels (i.e. on self-supervised tasks). We show that pruned masks obtained with or without labels reach comparable performance when re-trained on labels, suggesting that pruning operates similarly for self-supervised and supervised learning. Interestingly, we also find that pruning preserves the transfer performance of self-supervised subnetwork representations

Pruning Convolutional Neural Networks with Self-Supervision

Convolutional neural networks trained without supervision come close to matching performance with supervised pre-training, but sometimes at the cost of an even higher number of parameters. Extracting subnetworks from these large unsupervised convnets with preserved performance is of particular interest to make them less computationally intensive. Typical pruning methods operate during training on a task while trying to maintain the performance of the pruned network on the same task. However, in self-supervised feature learning, the training objective is agnostic on the representation transferability to downstream tasks. Thus, preserving performance for this objective does not ensure that the pruned subnetwork remains effective for solving downstream tasks. In this work, we investigate the use of standard pruning methods, developed primarily for supervised learning, for networks trained without labels (i.e. on self-supervised tasks). We show that pruned masks obtained with or without labels reach comparable performance when retrained on labels, suggesting that pruning operates similarly for self-supervised and supervised learning. Interestingly, we also find that pruning preserves the transfer performance of self-supervised subnetwork representations

Edge-InversionNet: Enabling Efficient Inference of InversionNet on Edge Devices

Seismic full waveform inversion (FWI) is a widely used technique in geophysics for inferring subsurface structures from seismic data. And InversionNet is one of the most successful data-driven machine learning models that is applied to seismic FWI. However, the high computing costs to run InversionNet have made it challenging to be efficiently deployed on edge devices that are usually resource-constrained. Therefore, we propose to employ the structured pruning algorithm to get a lightweight version of InversionNet, which can make an efficient inference on edge devices. And we also made a prototype with Raspberry Pi to run the lightweight InversionNet. Experimental results show that the pruned InversionNet can achieve up to 98.2 % reduction in computing resources with moderate model performance degradation

Unsupervised Learning of Visual Features by Contrasting Cluster Assignments

Unsupervised image representations have significantly reduced the gap with supervised pretraining, notably with the recent achievements of contrastive learning methods. These contrastive methods typically work online and rely on a large number of explicit pairwise feature comparisons, which is computationally challenging. In this paper, we propose an online algorithm, SwAV, that takes advantage of contrastive methods without requiring to compute pairwise comparisons. Specifically, our method simultaneously clusters the data while enforcing consistency between cluster assignments produced for different augmentations (or views) of the same image, instead of comparing features directly as in contrastive learning. Simply put, we use a swapped prediction mechanism where we predict the cluster assignment of a view from the representation of another view. Our method can be trained with large and small batches and can scale to unlimited amounts of data. Compared to previous contrastive methods, our method is more memory efficient since it does not require a large memory bank or a special momentum network. In addition, we also propose a new data augmentation strategy, multi-crop, that uses a mix of views with different resolutions in place of two full-resolution views, without increasing the memory or compute requirements much. We validate our findings by achieving 75.3% top-1 accuracy on ImageNet with ResNet-50, as well as surpassing supervised pretraining on all the considered transfer tasks.Comment: NeurIPS 202

A Survey on Deep Neural Network Pruning-Taxonomy, Comparison, Analysis, and Recommendations

Modern deep neural networks, particularly recent large language models, come with massive model sizes that require significant computational and storage resources. To enable the deployment of modern models on resource-constrained environments and accelerate inference time, researchers have increasingly explored pruning techniques as a popular research direction in neural network compression. However, there is a dearth of up-to-date comprehensive review papers on pruning. To address this issue, in this survey, we provide a comprehensive review of existing research works on deep neural network pruning in a taxonomy of 1) universal/specific speedup, 2) when to prune, 3) how to prune, and 4) fusion of pruning and other compression techniques. We then provide a thorough comparative analysis of seven pairs of contrast settings for pruning (e.g., unstructured/structured) and explore emerging topics, including post-training pruning, different levels of supervision for pruning, and broader applications (e.g., adversarial robustness) to shed light on the commonalities and differences of existing methods and lay the foundation for further method development. To facilitate future research, we build a curated collection of datasets, networks, and evaluations on different applications. Finally, we provide some valuable recommendations on selecting pruning methods and prospect promising research directions. We build a repository at https://github.com/hrcheng1066/awesome-pruning

Pruning Convolutional Neural Networks with Self-Supervision

Convolutional neural networks trained without supervision come close to matching performance with supervised pre-training, but sometimes at the cost of an even higher number of parameters. Extracting subnetworks from these large unsupervised convnets with preserved performance is of particular interest to make them less computationally intensive. Typical pruning methods operate during training on a task while trying to maintain the performance of the pruned network on the same task. However, in self-supervised feature learning, the training objective is agnostic on the representation transferability to downstream tasks. Thus, preserving performance for this objective does not ensure that the pruned subnetwork remains effective for solving downstream tasks. In this work, we investigate the use of standard pruning methods, developed primarily for supervised learning, for networks trained without labels (i.e. on self-supervised tasks). We show that pruned masks obtained with or without labels reach comparable performance when retrained on labels, suggesting that pruning operates similarly for self-supervised and supervised learning. Interestingly, we also find that pruning preserves the transfer performance of self-supervised subnetwork representations