Approximate Neural Architecture Search via Operation Distribution Learning
Authors:
Xingchen Wan,
Binxin Ru,
Pedro M. Esperança,
Fabio M. Carlucci
Abstract:
The standard paradigm in Neural Architecture Search (NAS) is to search for a fully deterministic architecture with specific operations and connections. In this work, we instead propose to search for the optimal operation distribution, thus providing a stochastic and approximate solution, which can be used to sample architectures of arbitrary length. We propose and show, that given an architectural…
▽ More
The standard paradigm in Neural Architecture Search (NAS) is to search for a fully deterministic architecture with specific operations and connections. In this work, we instead propose to search for the optimal operation distribution, thus providing a stochastic and approximate solution, which can be used to sample architectures of arbitrary length. We propose and show, that given an architectural cell, its performance largely depends on the ratio of used operations, rather than any specific connection pattern in typical search spaces; that is, small changes in the ordering of the operations are often irrelevant. This intuition is orthogonal to any specific search strategy and can be applied to a diverse set of NAS algorithms. Through extensive validation on 4 data-sets and 4 NAS techniques (Bayesian optimisation, differentiable search, local search and random search), we show that the operation distribution (1) holds enough discriminating power to reliably identify a solution and (2) is significantly easier to optimise than traditional encodings, leading to large speed-ups at little to no cost in performance. Indeed, this simple intuition significantly reduces the cost of current approaches and potentially enable NAS to be used in a broader range of applications.
△ Less
Submitted 8 November, 2021;
originally announced November 2021.
NAS evaluation is frustratingly hard
Authors:
Antoine Yang,
Pedro M. Esperança,
Fabio M. Carlucci
Abstract:
Neural Architecture Search (NAS) is an exciting new field which promises to be as much as a game-changer as Convolutional Neural Networks were in 2012. Despite many great works leading to substantial improvements on a variety of tasks, comparison between different methods is still very much an open issue. While most algorithms are tested on the same datasets, there is no shared experimental protoc…
▽ More
Neural Architecture Search (NAS) is an exciting new field which promises to be as much as a game-changer as Convolutional Neural Networks were in 2012. Despite many great works leading to substantial improvements on a variety of tasks, comparison between different methods is still very much an open issue. While most algorithms are tested on the same datasets, there is no shared experimental protocol followed by all. As such, and due to the under-use of ablation studies, there is a lack of clarity regarding why certain methods are more effective than others. Our first contribution is a benchmark of $8$ NAS methods on $5$ datasets. To overcome the hurdle of comparing methods with different search spaces, we propose using a method's relative improvement over the randomly sampled average architecture, which effectively removes advantages arising from expertly engineered search spaces or training protocols. Surprisingly, we find that many NAS techniques struggle to significantly beat the average architecture baseline. We perform further experiments with the commonly used DARTS search space in order to understand the contribution of each component in the NAS pipeline. These experiments highlight that: (i) the use of tricks in the evaluation protocol has a predominant impact on the reported performance of architectures; (ii) the cell-based search space has a very narrow accuracy range, such that the seed has a considerable impact on architecture rankings; (iii) the hand-designed macro-structure (cells) is more important than the searched micro-structure (operations); and (iv) the depth-gap is a real phenomenon, evidenced by the change in rankings between $8$ and $20$ cell architectures. To conclude, we suggest best practices, that we hope will prove useful for the community and help mitigate current NAS pitfalls. The code used is available at https://github.com/antoyang/NAS-Benchmark.
△ Less
Submitted 13 February, 2020; v1 submitted 28 December, 2019;
originally announced December 2019.
