OrthCaps: An Orthogonal CapsNet with Sparse Attention Routing and Pruning
Xinyu Geng, Jiaming Wang, Jiawei Gong, yuerong xue, Jun Xu, Fanglin Chen, Xiaolin Huang
OpenReview ground truth
TL;DR — We propose the Orthogonal Capsule Network (OrthCaps) to reduce redundancy, improve routing performance and decrease parameter count.
Abstract
Redundancy is a persistent challenge in Capsule Networks (CapsNet), leading to high computational costs and parameter counts (Jeong et al., 2019; Sharifi et al., 2021; Renzulli & Grangetto, 2022). Although previous works have introduced pruning after the initial capsule layer, dynamic routing’s iterative and fully connected nature reintroduces inefficiencies and redundancy in deeper layers. In this paper, we propose the Orthogonal Capsule Network (OrthCaps) to reduce redundancy, improve routing performance and decrease parameter count. Specifically, an efficient pruned capsule layer is placed to discard redundant capsules and dynamic routing is replaced with orthogonal sparse attention routing. Besides, we orthogonalize weight matrices during routing to ensure feature diversity and sustain low capsule similarity, the idea of which is inspired by the application of orthogonality in Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs). Moreover, a novel activation function named Capsule ReLU is proposed to address vanishing gradients. Our experiments on baseline datasets affirm the efficiency and robustness of OrthCaps in classification tasks, in which ablation studies validate the criticality of each component. Remarkably, with only 110k parameters, merely 1.25% of a standard Capsule Network’s total, OrthCaps-Shallow outperforms state-of-the-art (SOTA) benchmarks on four datasets, while OrthCaps-Deep attains nearly SOTA accuracy with 1.2% of its parameters on four datasets. The code is available at https://github.com/ornamentt/Orthogonal-Capsnet
Author context
Most prolific author: 4 submissions (credibility 1.00).
No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).
Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.
Ranking trajectory
Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.
Battle history — 30 comparisons
Ranked above opponent in 51% of matchups.
- ▼ lost to Learning 3D Particle-based Simulators from… ×4
- ▼ lost to Effective pruning of web-scale datasets ba… ×4
- ▼ lost to Unsupervised ASR via Cross-Lingual Pseudo-… ×4
- ▼ lost to Time- and Label-efficient Active Learning … ×4
- ▼ lost to Towards Generalizable Multi-Camera 3D Obje… ×4
Judge assessments
Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 30)