REVIEW 4 cited by
Is C4 Dataset Optimal for Pruning? An Investigation of Calibration Data for LLM Pruning
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
read the original abstract
Network pruning has emerged as a potential solution to make LLMs cheaper to deploy. However, existing LLM pruning approaches universally rely on the C4 dataset as the calibration data for calculating pruning scores, leaving its optimality unexplored. In this study, we evaluate the choice of calibration data on LLM pruning, across a wide range of datasets that are most commonly used in LLM training and evaluation, including four pertaining datasets as well as three categories of downstream tasks encompassing nine datasets. Each downstream dataset is prompted with In-Context Learning (ICL) and Chain-of-Thought (CoT), respectively. Besides the already intriguing observation that the choice of calibration data significantly impacts the performance of pruned LLMs, our results also uncover several subtle and often unexpected findings, summarized as follows: (1) C4 is not the optimal choice for LLM pruning, even among commonly used pre-training datasets; (2) arithmetic datasets, when used as calibration data, performs on par or even better than pre-training datasets; (3) pruning with downstream datasets does not necessarily help the corresponding downstream task, compared to pre-training data; (4) ICL is widely beneficial to all data categories, whereas CoT is only useful on certain tasks. Our findings shed light on the importance of carefully selecting calibration data for LLM pruning and pave the way for more efficient deployment of these powerful models in real-world applications. We release our code at: https://github.com/abx393/llm-pruning-calibration-data.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
Frequency Matters: Fast Model-Agnostic Data Curation for Pruning and Quantization
ZipCal curates calibration data for LLM pruning and quantization by maximizing lexical diversity via Zipfian power laws, outperforming random sampling and matching perplexity-based methods at 240x speed.
-
Reasoning Models Can be Accurately Pruned Via Chain-of-Thought Reconstruction
A pruning technique called Reasoning-Aware Compression (RAC) jointly reconstructs input and chain-of-thought activations to preserve reasoning performance better than standard methods when compressing models like DeepSeek-R1.
-
Condense, Don't Just Prune: Enhancing Efficiency and Performance in MoE Layer Pruning
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.
-
Frequency Matters: Fast Model-Agnostic Data Curation for Pruning and Quantization
ZipCal curates calibration sets for LLM pruning and quantization by maximizing Zipfian lexical diversity, matching model-perplexity methods at ~240× lower cost.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.