user: text: Write a concise one-sentence TLDR summary of the scientific paper content below.

Title: LEARNING TO SHARE: SIMULTANEOUS PARAMETER TYING AND SPARSIFICATION IN DEEP LEARNING

Paper content:
Deep neural networks (DNNs) usually contain millions, maybe billions, of parameters/weights, making both storage and computation very expensive.
This has motivated a large body of work to reduce the complexity of the neural network by using sparsity-inducing regularizers.
Another well-known approach for controlling the complexity of DNNs is parameter sharing/tying, where certain sets of weights are forced to share a common value.
Some forms of weight sharing are hard-wired to express certain in- variances, with a notable example being the shift-invariance of convolutional layers.
However, there may be other groups of weights that may be tied together during the learning process, thus further re- ducing the complexity of the network.
In this paper, we adopt a recently proposed sparsity-inducing regularizer, named GrOWL (group ordered weighted l1), which encourages sparsity and, simulta- neously, learns which groups of parameters should share a common value.
GrOWL has been proven effective in linear regression, being able to identify and cope with strongly correlated covariates.
Unlike standard sparsity-inducing regularizers (e.g., l1 a.k.a.
Lasso), GrOWL not only eliminates unimportant neurons by setting all the corresponding weights to zero, but also explicitly identifies strongly correlated neurons by tying the corresponding weights to a common value.
This ability of GrOWL motivates the following two-stage procedure: (i) use GrOWL regularization in the training process to simultaneously identify significant neurons and groups of parameter that should be tied together; (ii) retrain the network, enforcing the structure that was unveiled in the previous phase, i.e., keeping only the significant neurons and enforcing the learned tying structure.
We evaluate the proposed approach on several benchmark datasets, showing that it can dramatically compress the network with slight or even no loss on generalization performance.
Deep neural networks (DNNs) have recently revolutionized machine learning by dramatically advancing the state-of-the-art in several applications, ranging from speech and image recognition to playing video games BID20 .
A typical DNN consists of a sequence of concatenated layers, potentially involving millions or billions of parameters; by using very large training sets, DNNs are able to learn extremely complex non-linear mappings, features, and dependencies.A large amount of research has focused on the use of regularization in DNN learning BID20 , as a means of reducing the generalization error.
It has been shown that the parametrization of many DNNs is very redundant, with a large fraction of the parameters being predictable from the remaining ones, with no accuracy loss BID14 .
Several regularization methods have been proposed to tackle the potential over-fitting due to this redundancy.
Arguably, the earliest and simplest choice is the classical 2 norm, known as weight decay in the early neural networks literature , and as ridge regression in statistics.
In the past two decades, sparsity-inducing regularization based on the 1 norm (often known as Lasso) BID35 , and variants thereof, became standard tools in statistics and machine learning, including in deep learning BID20 .
Recently, BID32 used group-Lasso (a variant of Lasso that assumes that parameters are organized in groups and encourages sparsity at the group level BID37 ) in deep learning.
One of the effects of Lasso or group-Lasso regularization in learning a DNN is that many of the parameters may become exactly zero, thus reducing the amount of memory needed to store the model, and lowering the computational cost of applying it.Figure 1: A DNN is first trained with GrOWL regularization to simultaneously identify the sparse but significant connectivities and the correlated cluster information of the selected features.
We then retrain the neural network only in terms of the selected connectivities while enforcing parameter sharing within each cluster.It has been pointed out by several authors that a major drawback of Lasso (or group-Lasso) regularization is that in the presence of groups of highly correlated covariates/features, it tends to select only one or an arbitrary convex combination of features from each group BID6 BID7 BID17 BID28 BID42 .
Moreover, the learning process tends to be unstable, in the sense that subsets of parameters that end up being selected may change dramatically with minor changes in the data or algorithmic procedure.
In DNNs, it is almost unavoidable to encounter correlated features, not only due to the high dimensionality of the input to each layer, but also because neurons tend to co-adapt, yielding strongly correlated features that are passed as input to the subsequent layer BID34 .In
this work, we propose using, as a regularizer for learning DNNs, the group version of the ordered weighted 1 (OWL) norm BID17 , termed group-OWL (GrOWL), which was recently proposed by BID28 . In
a linear regression context, GrOWL regularization has been shown to avoid the above mentioned deficiency of group-Lasso regularization. In
addition to being a sparsity-inducing regularizer, GrOWL is able to explicitly identify groups of correlated features and set the corresponding parameters/weights to be very close or exactly equal to each other, thus taking advantage of correlated features, rather than being negatively affected by them. In
deep learning parlance, this corresponds to adaptive parameter sharing/tying, where instead of having to define a priori which sets of parameters are forced to share a common value, these sets are learned during the training process. We
exploit this ability of GrOWL regularization to encourage parameter sparsity and group-clustering in a two-stage procedure depicted in Fig. 1 : we first use GrOWL to identify the significant parameters/weights of the network and, simultaneously, the correlated cluster information of the selected features; then, we retrain the network only in terms of the selected features, while enforcing the weights within the same cluster to share a common value.The experiments reported below confirm that using GrOWL regularization in learning DNNs encourages sparsity and also yields parameter sharing, by forcing groups of weights to share a common absolute value. We
test the proposed approach on two benchmark datasets, MNIST and CIFAR-10, comparing it with weight decay and group-Lasso regularization, and exploring the accuracy-memory trade-off. Our
results indicate that GrOWL is able to reduce the number of free parameters in the network without degrading the accuracy, as compared to other approaches.
We have proposed using the recent GrOWL regularizer for simultaneous parameter sparsity and tying in DNN learning.
By leveraging on GrOWL's capability of simultaneously pruning redundant parameters and tying parameters associated with highly correlated features, we achieve significant reduction of model complexity, with a slight or even no loss in generalization accuracy.
We evaluate the proposed method on both a fully connected neural network and a deep convolutional neural network.
The results show that GrOWL can compress large DNNs by factors ranging from 11.4 to 14.5, with negligible loss on accuracy.The correlation patterns identified by GrOWL are close to those of the input features to each layer.
This may be important to reveal the structure of the features, contributing to the interpretability of deep learning models.
On the other hand, by automatically tying together the parameters corresponding to highly correlated features, GrOWL alleviates the negative effect of strong correlations that might be induced by the noisy input or the co-adaption tendency of DNNs.The gap in the accuracy vs memory trade-off obtained by applying GrOWL and group-Lasso decreases as we move to large DNNs.
Although we suspect this can be caused by running a much larger network on a simple dataset, it motivates us to explore different ways to apply GrOWL to compress neural networks.
One possible approach is to apply GrOWL within each neuron by predefining each 2D convolutional filter as a group (instead all 2D convolutional filters corresponding to the same input features).
By doing so, we encourage parameter sharing among much smaller units, which in turn would further improve the diversity vs parameter sharing trade-off.
We leave this for future work.

assistant: text: We have proposed using the recent GrOWL regularizer for simultaneous parameter sparsity and tying in DNN learning.