($\texttt{PASS}$) Visual Prompt Locates Good Structure Sparisty through a Recurent HyperNetwork
Tianjin Huang, Meng Fang, Li Shen, Fan Liu, Yulong Pei, Mykola Pechenizkiy, Shiwei Liu, Tianlong Chen
OpenReview ground truth
TL;DR — We proposed a novel method $\textit{i.e.}$, $\texttt{PASS}$ that is a tailored hyper-network to take both visual prompts and network weight statistics as input, and output layer-wise channel sparsity in a recurrent manner.
Abstract
Large-scale neural networks have demonstrated remarkable performance in different domains like vision and language processing, although at the cost of massive computation resources. As illustrated by compression literature, structured model pruning is a prominent algorithm to encourage model efficiency, thanks to its acceleration-friendly sparsity patterns. One of the key questions of structural pruning is how to estimate the channel significance. In parallel, work on data-centric AI has shown that prompting-based techniques enable impressive generalization of large language models across diverse downstream tasks. In this paper, we investigate a charming possibility - *leveraging visual prompts to capture the channel importance and derive high-quality structural sparsity*. To this end, we propose a novel algorithmic framework, namely \texttt{PASS}. It is a tailored hyper-network to take both visual prompts and network weight statistics as input, and output layer-wise channel sparsity in a recurrent manner. Such designs consider the intrinsic channel dependency between layers. Comprehensive experiments across multiple network architectures and six datasets demonstrate the superiority of $\texttt{PASS}$ in locating good structural sparsity. For example, at the same FLOPs level, $\texttt{PASS}$ subnetworks achieve 1\%$\sim$3\% better accuracy on Food101 dataset; or with a similar performance of 80\% accuracy, $\texttt{PASS}$ subnetworks obtain 0.35$\times$ more speedup than the baselines. Codes are provided in the supplements.
Author context
Most prolific author: 22 submissions (credibility 0.57).
Delta if applied: -0.2 percentile
Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.
Ranking trajectory
Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.
Battle history — 32 comparisons
Ranked above opponent in 45% of matchups.
- ▼ lost to RefConv: Re-parameterized Refocusing Convo… ×6
- ▲ beat Delayed Spiking Neural Network and Exponen… ×4
- ▲ beat DAG-based Generative Regression ×4
- ▲ beat Constructing Sparse Neural Architecture wi… ×4
- ▲ beat SlowFormer: Universal Adversarial Patch fo… ×4
Judge assessments
Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 32)