Keywords: multilinguality, pruning, large-language models, interpretability
TL;DR: This study compares the effectiveness of various calibration languages in pruning multilingual models and examies changes in the model's internal representations.
Abstract: Recent advances in large language model (LLM) pruning have shown state-of-the-art (SotA) compression results in post-training and retraining-free settings while maintaining high predictive performance. However, previous research mainly considered calibrating based on English text, despite the multilingual nature of modern LLMs and their frequent use in non-English languages. In this paper, we set out to investigate calibrating the pruning of multilingual language models for monolingual applications. We present the first comprehensive empirical study, comparing different calibration languages for pruning multilingual models across diverse languages, tasks, models, and SotA pruning techniques. Our results offer practical suggestions, for example, calibrating in the target language can efficiently retain the language modeling capability but does not necessarily benefit downstream tasks. Through further analysis of latent subspaces, pruning masks, and individual neurons within pruned models, we find that while pruning generally preserves strong language-specific features, it may fail to retain language-specific neuron activation patterns and subtle, language-agnostic features associated with knowledge and reasoning that are needed for complex tasks.
Supplementary Material: zip
Primary Area: interpretability and explainable AI
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.
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: 11278
Loading