Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Evolving Search Space for Neural Architecture Search

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2011.10904 v2 pith:GIG6EF4X submitted 2020-11-22 cs.CV

Evolving Search Space for Neural Architecture Search

classification cs.CV
keywords searchspaceneuralarchitecturedesignpreviousaccuracyarchitectures
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

The automation of neural architecture design has been a coveted alternative to human experts. Recent works have small search space, which is easier to optimize but has a limited upper bound of the optimal solution. Extra human design is needed for those methods to propose a more suitable space with respect to the specific task and algorithm capacity. To further enhance the degree of automation for neural architecture search, we present a Neural Search-space Evolution (NSE) scheme that iteratively amplifies the results from the previous effort by maintaining an optimized search space subset. This design minimizes the necessity of a well-designed search space. We further extend the flexibility of obtainable architectures by introducing a learnable multi-branch setting. By employing the proposed method, a consistent performance gain is achieved during a progressive search over upcoming search spaces. We achieve 77.3% top-1 retrain accuracy on ImageNet with 333M FLOPs, which yielded a state-of-the-art performance among previous auto-generated architectures that do not involve knowledge distillation or weight pruning. When the latency constraint is adopted, our result also performs better than the previous best-performing mobile models with a 77.9% Top-1 retrain accuracy.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.