Local Search is a Remarkably Strong Baseline for Neural Architecture Search
April 20, 2020 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐ International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
T. Den Ottelander, A. Dushatskiy, M. Virgolin, P. A. N. Bosman
arXiv ID
2004.08996
Category
cs.NE: Neural & Evolutionary
Citations
39
Venue
International Conference on Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
Neural Architecture Search (NAS), i.e., the automation of neural network design, has gained much popularity in recent years with increasingly complex search algorithms being proposed. Yet, solid comparisons with simple baselines are often missing. At the same time, recent retrospective studies have found many new algorithms to be no better than random search (RS). In this work we consider, for the first time, a simple Local Search (LS) algorithm for NAS. We particularly consider a multi-objective NAS formulation, with network accuracy and network complexity as two objectives, as understanding the trade-off between these two objectives is arguably the most interesting aspect of NAS. The proposed LS algorithm is compared with RS and two evolutionary algorithms (EAs), as these are often heralded as being ideal for multi-objective optimization. To promote reproducibility, we create and release two benchmark datasets, named MacroNAS-C10 and MacroNAS-C100, containing 200K saved network evaluations for two established image classification tasks, CIFAR-10 and CIFAR-100. Our benchmarks are designed to be complementary to existing benchmarks, especially in that they are better suited for multi-objective search. We additionally consider a version of the problem with a much larger architecture space. While we find and show that the considered algorithms explore the search space in fundamentally different ways, we also find that LS substantially outperforms RS and even performs nearly as good as state-of-the-art EAs. We believe that this provides strong evidence that LS is truly a competitive baseline for NAS against which new NAS algorithms should be benchmarked.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
๐ Similar Papers
In the same crypt โ Neural & Evolutionary
๐ฎ
๐ฎ
The Ethereal
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Deep Learning using Rectified Linear Units (ReLU)
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Generative Adversarial Text to Image Synthesis
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Regularized Evolution for Image Classifier Architecture Search
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Temporal Ensembling for Semi-Supervised Learning
๐
๐
Old Age
Learning Structured Sparsity in Deep Neural Networks
Died the same way โ ๐ป Ghosted
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted