arXiv:2606. 10445v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Semi-structured 2:4 sparsity is widely supported by modern accelerators, providing up to a 2x theoretical speedup.
By Jaeseong Lee, Seung-won Hwang, Samyam Rajbhandari
Semi-structured 2:4 sparsity is widely supported by modern accelerators, providing up to a 2x theoretical speedup. However, its strict 50% sparsity constraint often causes non-negligible accuracy degradation under post-training pruning.
arXiv:2607. 28418v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Pruning is a promising approach for improving the efficiency of LLMs.
By Haozhe Hu, Hao Wu, Peiran Yin, Chao Han, Yunpu Ma, Xiaoyu Shen
arXiv:2605. 17289v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Unstructured sparsity is now natively accelerated by recent GPU kernels and dataflow hardware, shifting the bottleneck from inference execution to the pruning algorithm.
By Mohammad Mozaffari, Younes Hourri, Mohammad Rastegari, Mahyar Najibi
arXiv:2609.10311v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: The lottery ticket hypothesis posits the existence of winning tickets: sparse subnetworks that, when trained in isolation from their original initial...
By Benedikt Tscheschner, Eduardo Veas, Marc Masana
The paper introduces Soft-OMP and Soft-IHT, permutation‑based variants of Orthogonal Matching Pursuit and Iterative Hard Thresholding that replace the non‑differentiable argsort with continuous soft‑sort operators. These differentiable algorithms enable the construction of fully trainable neural network architectures—OMP‑Net and IHT‑Net—while preserving the core greedy sparse recovery logic. The authors show both theoretically and numerically that the soft variants approximate their hard counterparts with controllable accuracy and can be extended to structured sparse recovery by learning structure‑aware weights.
By Sina Mohammad-Taheri, Matthew J. Colbrook, Simone Brugiapaglia
arXiv:2604.13287v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Weight pruning is a common technique for compressing large neural networks. We focus on the challenging post-training one-shot setting, where a pre...
By Gabriel Afriat, Xiang Meng, Shibal Ibrahim, Hussein Hazimeh, Rahul Mazumder
arXiv:2607. 15745v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Common practice when training Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) is to use randomly shuffled mini-batches.
By Anxhelo Shehu, Enes Stastoli, Arben Cela
arXiv:2607. 20555v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The lottery ticket hypothesis proposes that large random neural networks contain sparse subnetworks that can match the performance of dense models after comparable training.
By Bryce A. Christopherson, Jack Baretz, Darian Colgrove, Salah Dandan
arXiv:2607. 21985v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The increasing deployment of large language models (LLMs) has magnified the computational and memory bottlenecks of autoregressive decoding, where low compute intensity and bandwidth-bound kernels dominate inference cost.
By Jinhyeok Kim, Yejoon Lee, Jaeyoung Do
arXiv:2609.38095v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Backpropagation (BP) dominates deep learning but imposes a massive memory tax. For example, training OPT-30B with Adam requires $\approx$ 600GB of GPU...
By Francois Chaubard, Mykel J. Kochenderfer, Chris R\'e
The paper introduces the "Compression Trinity," a unified framework that jointly applies sparsity, quantization, and low‑rank approximations to compress large language models. It presents several methods—MKOR, SLoPe, OPTIMA, PATCH, and SLiM—that leverage these three pillars to accelerate training, reduce memory bandwidth, and recover accuracy, achieving significant speedups and accuracy gains over existing techniques. The results demonstrate that combining all three compression strategies is essential for efficient, scalable, high‑performance LLM deployment.
By Mohammad Mozaffari