Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Simulated Annealing in Early Layers Leads to Better Generalization

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 2304.04858 v1 pith:2FZLUUAS submitted 2023-04-10 cs.LG cs.CV

Simulated Annealing in Early Layers Leads to Better Generalization

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

Recently, a number of iterative learning methods have been introduced to improve generalization. These typically rely on training for longer periods of time in exchange for improved generalization. LLF (later-layer-forgetting) is a state-of-the-art method in this category. It strengthens learning in early layers by periodically re-initializing the last few layers of the network. Our principal innovation in this work is to use Simulated annealing in EArly Layers (SEAL) of the network in place of re-initialization of later layers. Essentially, later layers go through the normal gradient descent process, while the early layers go through short stints of gradient ascent followed by gradient descent. Extensive experiments on the popular Tiny-ImageNet dataset benchmark and a series of transfer learning and few-shot learning tasks show that we outperform LLF by a significant margin. We further show that, compared to normal training, LLF features, although improving on the target task, degrade the transfer learning performance across all datasets we explored. In comparison, our method outperforms LLF across the same target datasets by a large margin. We also show that the prediction depth of our method is significantly lower than that of LLF and normal training, indicating on average better prediction performance.

discussion (0)

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