In defense of parameter sharing for model-compression

When considering a model architecture, there are several ways to reduce its memory footprint. Historically, popular approaches included selecting smaller architectures and creating sparse networks through pruning. More recently, randomized parameter-sharing (RPS) methods have gained traction for model compression atstart of training. In this paper, we comprehensively assess the trade-off betweenmemory and accuracy across RPS, pruning techniques, and building smaller models. Our findings demonstrate that RPS, which is both data and model-agnostic, consistently outperforms smaller models and all moderately informed pruning strategies, such as MAG, SNIP, SYNFLOW, and GRASP, across the entire compression range. This advantage becomes particularly pronounced in higher compression scenarios. Notably, even when compared to highly informed pruning techniques like Lottery Ticket Rewinding (LTR), RPS exhibits superior performance in high compression settings. This points out inherent capacity advantage that RPS enjoys over sparse models. Theoretically, we establish RPS as a superiortechnique in terms of memory-efficient representation when compared to pruningfor linear models. This paper argues in favor of paradigm shift towards RPS basedmodels. During our rigorous evaluation of RPS, we identified issues in the state-of-the-art RPS technique ROAST, specifically regarding stability (ROAST’s sensitivity to initialization hyperparameters, often leading to divergence) and Pareto-continuity (ROAST’s inability to recover the accuracy of the original model at zerocompression). We provably address both of these issues. We refer to the modifiedRPS, which incorporates our improvements, as STABLE-RPS