Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Understanding the Effect of the Long Tail on Neural Network Compression

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 2306.06238 v3 pith:7H3ZWRAM submitted 2023-06-09 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CV

Understanding the Effect of the Long Tail on Neural Network Compression

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

Network compression is now a mature sub-field of neural network research: over the last decade, significant progress has been made towards reducing the size of models and speeding up inference, while maintaining the classification accuracy. However, many works have observed that focusing on just the overall accuracy can be misguided. E.g., it has been shown that mismatches between the full and compressed models can be biased towards under-represented classes. This raises the important research question, can we achieve network compression while maintaining "semantic equivalence" with the original network? In this work, we study this question in the context of the "long tail" phenomenon in computer vision datasets observed by Feldman, et al. They argue that memorization of certain inputs (appropriately defined) is essential to achieving good generalization. As compression limits the capacity of a network (and hence also its ability to memorize), we study the question: are mismatches between the full and compressed models correlated with the memorized training data? We present positive evidence in this direction for image classification tasks, by considering different base architectures and compression schemes.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. QuantiBias: Benchmarking Quantization-Induced Bias in LLMs

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    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.