Distilling the Knowledge in Data Pruning
Keywords: Data pruning, Knowledge distillation
Abstract: With the increasing size of datasets used for training neural networks, data pruning has gained traction in recent years.
However, most current data pruning algorithms are limited in their ability to preserve accuracy compared to models trained on the full data, especially in high pruning regimes.
In this paper we explore the application of data pruning while incorporating knowledge distillation (KD) when training on a pruned subset.
That is, rather than relying solely on ground-truth labels, we also use the soft predictions from a teacher network pre-trained on the complete data.
By integrating KD into training, we demonstrate significant improvement across datasets, pruning methods, and on all pruning fractions.
We first establish a theoretical motivation for employing self-distillation to improve training on pruned data.
Then, we empirically make a compelling and highly practical observation: using KD, simple random pruning is comparable or superior to sophisticated pruning methods across all pruning regimes.
On ImageNet for example, we achieve superior accuracy despite training on a random subset of only 50\% of the data.
Additionally, we demonstrate a crucial connection between the pruning factor and the optimal knowledge distillation weight. This helps mitigate the impact of samples with noisy labels and low-quality images retained by typical pruning algorithms.
Finally, we make an intriguing observation: when using lower pruning fractions, larger teachers lead to accuracy degradation, while surprisingly, employing teachers with a smaller capacity than the student's may improve results.
Our code will be made available.
Primary Area: learning theory
Code Of Ethics: I acknowledge that I and all co-authors of this work have read and commit to adhering to the ICLR Code of Ethics.
Submission Guidelines: I certify that this submission complies with the submission instructions as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/AuthorGuide.
Reciprocal Reviewing: I understand the reciprocal reviewing requirement as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/CallForPapers. If none of the authors are registered as a reviewer, it may result in a desk rejection at the discretion of the program chairs. To request an exception, please complete this form at https://forms.gle/Huojr6VjkFxiQsUp6.
Anonymous Url: I certify that there is no URL (e.g., github page) that could be used to find authors’ identity.
No Acknowledgement Section: I certify that there is no acknowledgement section in this submission for double blind review.
Submission Number: 1638
Loading