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

Title: How fine can fine-tuning be?  Learning efficient language models

Paper content:
State-of-the-art performances on language comprehension tasks are achieved by huge language models pre-trained on massive unlabeled text corpora, with very light subsequent fine-tuning in a task-specific supervised manner.
It seems the pre-training procedure learns a very good common initialization for further training on various natural language understanding tasks, such that only few steps need to be taken in the parameter space to learn each task.
In this work, using Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) as an example, we verify this hypothesis by showing that task-specific fine-tuned language models are highly close in parameter space to the pre-trained one.
Taking advantage of such observations, we further show that the fine-tuned versions of these huge models, having on the order of $10^8$ floating-point parameters, can be made very computationally efficient.
First, fine-tuning only a fraction of critical layers suffices.
Second, fine-tuning can be adequately performed by learning a binary multiplicative mask on pre-trained weights, \textit{i.e.} by parameter-sparsification.
As a result, with a single effort, we achieve three desired outcomes: (1) learning to perform specific tasks, (2) saving memory by storing only binary masks of certain layers for each task, and (3) saving compute on appropriate hardware by performing sparse operations with model parameters.
One very puzzling fact about overparameterized deep neural networks is that sheer increases in dimensionality of the parameter space seldom make stochastic gradient-based optimization more difficult.
Given an effective network architecture reflecting proper inductive biases, deeper and/or wider networks take just about the same, if not a lower, number of training iterations to converge, a number often by orders of magnitude smaller than the dimensionality of the parameter space.
For example, ResNet-18 (parameter count 11.7M) and ResNet-152 (parameter count 60.2M) both train to converge, at similar convergence rates, in no more than 600K iterations on Imagenet (He et al., 2015) .
Meaningful optimization seems to happen in only a very low-dimensional parameter subspace, viz. the span of those relatively few weight updates, with its dimensionality not ostensibly scaling with the model size.
In other words, the network seems already perfectly converged along most of the parameter dimensions at initialization, suggesting that training only marginally alters a high-dimensional parameter configuration.
This phenomenon is epitomized in fine-tuning of pre-trained models.
Pre-training is a, often unsupervised, learning procedure that yields a good common initialization for further supervised learning of various downstream tasks.
The better a pre-trained model is, the fewer iterations are required on average to fine-tune it to perform specific tasks, resulting in fine-tuned models hypothetically closer 1 to the pre-trained one in parameter space.
However, better pre-trained models are, almost always, larger models (Hestness et al., 2017) , and nowhere is this trend more prominent than recent pretrained language models that achieved state-of-the-art natural language understanding performance, e.g. GPT-2 (Radford et al., 2019 ) has 1.5B parameters.
Thus, a problem naturally arises hand-in-hand with an obvious hint to its solution: as pre-trained models get larger, on the one hand, computation of each fine-tuned model becomes more expensive in terms of both memory and compute for inference, while on the other hand, greater closeness between the pre-trained and fine-tuned models in the parameter space prescribes a higher degree of computational redundancy that could be potentially avoided.
Additionally, there might exist more computationally efficient fine-tuned networks that are not necessarily close to, but cheaply attainable from, the pre-trained parameters, which are shared across all tasks.
In this study, we seek to address these questions, using Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) (Devlin et al., 2018) and the General Language Understanding Evaluation (GLUE) benchmark tasks (Wang et al., 2018) as a working example.
We first found that the fine-tuned and pre-trained parameters are both L 1 -close and angular-close in parameter space, consistent with the small number of fine-tuning iterations separating them.
Next, we demonstrated that there also exist good fine-tuned models that are L 0 -close (i.e. having a small number of different components) to the pre-trained one.
Further, we showed that there exist good fine-tuned parameters that are L 0 -small (i.e. sparse, or having a large fraction of zero components).
Finally, we successfully found fine-tuned language models that are both L 0 -small and L 0 -close to the pre-trained models.
We remark the practical implications of these constraints.
By forcing fine-tuned parameters to be L 0 -close to the pre-trained ones, one only needs to store a small number of different weights per task, in addition to the common pre-trained weights, substantially saving parameter memory.
By forcing fine-tuned parameters to be sparse, one potentially saves memory and compute, provided proper hardware acceleration of sparse linear algebraic operations.
Surprisingly, our findings also reveal an abundance of good task-specific parameter configurations within a sparse L 0 -vicinity of large pre-trained language models like BERT: a specific task can be learned by simply masking anywhere between 1% to 40% of the pre-trained weights to zero.
See Figure 1 for an explanation of the L 0 -and sparse L 0 -vicinities.
Figure 1: An illustration of the L 0 -vicinity and the sparse L 0 -vicinity of a pre-trained parameter in a three-dimensional parameter space.
The L 0 -vicinity is continuous and contains parameters that are L 0 -close, whereas the sparse L 0 -vicinity is a discrete subset of L 0 -close parameters that are also L 0 -small.
We show that, due to surprisingly frequent occurrences of good parameter configurations in the sparse L 0 -vicinity of large pre-trained language models, two techniques are highly effective in producing efficient fine-tuned networks to perform specific language understanding tasks: (1) optimizing only the most sensitive layers and (2) learning to sparsify parameters.
In contrast to commonly employed post-training compression methods that have to trade off with performance degradation, our procedure of generating sparse networks is by itself an optimization process that learns specific tasks.

assistant: text: Sparsification as fine-tuning of language models