Detailed Instructions: In this task, you are given the abstract of a research paper. Your task is to generate a summary of this abstract. Your summary should not be very short, but it's better if it's not more than 30 words.
See one example below:
Problem: Mixed precision training (MPT) is becoming a practical technique to improve the speed and energy efficiency of training deep neural networks by leveraging the fast hardware support for IEEE half-precision floating point that is available in existing GPUs. MPT is typically used in combination with a technique called loss scaling, that works by scaling up the loss value up before the start of backpropagation in order to minimize the impact of numerical underflow on training. Unfortunately, existing methods make this loss scale value a hyperparameter that needs to be tuned per-model, and a single scale cannot be adapted to different layers at different training stages. We introduce a loss scaling-based training method called adaptive loss scaling that makes MPT easier and more practical to use, by removing the need to tune a model-specific loss scale hyperparameter. We achieve this by introducing layer-wise loss scale values which are automatically computed during training to deal with underflow more effectively than existing methods. We present experimental results on a variety of networks and tasks that show our approach can shorten the time to convergence and improve accuracy, compared with using the existing state-of-the-art MPT and single-precision floating point.
Solution: We devise adaptive loss scaling to improve mixed precision training that surpass the state-of-the-art results.
Explanation: The abstract focusses on designing an adaptive loss scaling method, hence the generated output is correct.

Problem: {\em Saliency methods} attempt to explain a deep net's decision by assigning a {\em score} to each feature/pixel in the input, often doing this credit-assignment via the gradient of the output with respect to input.
Recently \citet{adebayosan} questioned the validity of many of these methods since they do not pass simple {\em sanity checks}, which test whether the scores shift/vanish when layers of the trained net are randomized, or when the net is retrained using random labels for inputs. % for the inputs. %Surprisingly, the tested methods did not pass these checks: the explanations were relatively unchanged .

We propose a simple fix to existing saliency methods that helps them pass sanity checks, which we call {\em competition for pixels}. This involves computing saliency maps for all possible labels in the classification task, and using a simple competition among them to identify and remove less relevant pixels from the map. Some theoretical justification is provided for it and its performance is empirically demonstrated on several popular methods.
Solution:
We devise a mechanism called competition among pixels that allows (approximately) complete saliency methods to pass the sanity checks.