Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

FinerCut: Finer-grained Interpretable Layer Pruning for Large Language Models

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 2405.18218 v2 pith:M7LYZ5JH submitted 2024-05-28 cs.LG

FinerCut: Finer-grained Interpretable Layer Pruning for Large Language Models

classification cs.LG
keywords layerspruningfinercutlargemodelsobserveperformanceremoved
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Overparametrized transformer networks are the state-of-the-art architecture for Large Language Models (LLMs). However, such models contain billions of parameters making large compute a necessity, while raising environmental concerns. To address these issues, we propose FinerCut, a new form of fine-grained layer pruning, which in contrast to prior work at the transformer block level, considers all self-attention and feed-forward network (FFN) layers within blocks as individual pruning candidates. FinerCut prunes layers whose removal causes minimal alternation to the model's output -- contributing to a new, lean, interpretable, and task-agnostic pruning method. Tested across 9 benchmarks, our approach retains 90% performance of Llama3-8B with 25% layers removed, and 95% performance of Llama3-70B with 30% layers removed, all without fine-tuning or post-pruning reconstruction. Strikingly, we observe intriguing results with FinerCut: 42% (34 out of 80) of the self-attention layers in Llama3-70B can be removed while preserving 99% of its performance -- without additional fine-tuning after removal. Moreover, FinerCut provides a tool to inspect the types and locations of pruned layers, allowing to observe interesting pruning behaviors. For instance, we observe a preference for pruning self-attention layers, often at deeper consecutive decoder layers. We hope our insights inspire future efficient LLM architecture designs.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Understanding Layer Patching in Model Size Interpolation

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    Optimal layer-patching order for boomerang distillation is a shortest path on a KL-weighted Boolean lattice; greedy KLPatch and simple sequential orders often yield near-optimal interpolations.

  2. Don't Go Breaking My LLM: The Impact of Pruning Attention Layers on Explanation Faithfulness and Confidence Calibration

    cs.LG 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Pruning attention layers in five LLMs across eight datasets maintains accuracy but degrades faithfulness and calibration.

  3. Complementary Attention Head Pruning for Efficient Transformers

    cs.LG 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    CAHP prunes transformer attention heads via graph-based clustering on information-theoretic distances, automatically selects the number of heads from a polynomial-fitted performance curve, and reports better results t...

  4. Condense, Don't Just Prune: Enhancing Efficiency and Performance in MoE Layer Pruning

    cs.LG 2024-11 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    CD-MoE condenses fine-grained MoE layers with shared experts into dense layers, retaining 90% accuracy with 27.5% memory cut and 1.26x speedup on DeepSeekMoE-16B, recovering 98% via brief fine-tuning.