REVIEW 1 cited by
Pruning has a disparate impact on model accuracy
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
Pruning has a disparate impact on model accuracy
read the original abstract
Network pruning is a widely-used compression technique that is able to significantly scale down overparameterized models with minimal loss of accuracy. This paper shows that pruning may create or exacerbate disparate impacts. The paper sheds light on the factors to cause such disparities, suggesting differences in gradient norms and distance to decision boundary across groups to be responsible for this critical issue. It analyzes these factors in detail, providing both theoretical and empirical support, and proposes a simple, yet effective, solution that mitigates the disparate impacts caused by pruning.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
QuantiBias: Benchmarking Quantization-Induced Bias in LLMs
Quantization leaves refusal and multiple-choice bias checks flat while open-ended stereotype endorsement remains high (~24–27% under an independent judge), a gap standard safety evaluations miss.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.