PreprintCited by 127Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsMachine Learning and Data ClassificationDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

Stabilizing Differentiable Architecture Search via Perturbation-based Regularization

Open access
Chen, Xiangning, Hsieh, Cho-Jui·2020·arXiv

Abstract

Differentiable architecture search (DARTS) is a prevailing NAS solution to identify architectures. Based on the continuous relaxation of the architecture space, DARTS learns a differentiable architecture weight and largely reduces the search cost. However, its stability has been challenged for yielding deteriorating architectures as the search proceeds. We find that the precipitous validation loss landscape, which leads to a dramatic performance drop when distilling the final architecture, is an essential factor that causes instability. Based on this observation, we propose a perturbation-based regularization - SmoothDARTS (SDARTS), to smooth the loss landscape and improve the generalizability of DARTS-based methods. In particular, our new formulations stabilize DARTS-based methods by either random smoothing or adversarial attack. The search trajectory on NAS-Bench-1Shot1 demonstrates the effectiveness of our approach and due to the improved stability, we achieve performance gain across various search spaces on 4 datasets. Furthermore, we mathematically show that SDARTS implicitly regularizes the Hessian norm of the validation loss, which accounts for a smoother loss landscape and improved performance.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2002.05283

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The convergence to a smooth landscape benefits the generalization of deep neural networks.

    “The convergence to a smooth landscape has been shown to benefit the generalization of deep neural networks (Chen and Hsieh, 2020; Chen et al., 2022; Foret et al., 2021; Keskar et al., 2017).”

    From Symbolic Discovery of Optimization Algorithms (2023) · cites this paper as Chen and Hsieh, 2020

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, X., & Hsieh, C.-J.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2020
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3006500080
Cited by
126
References
51
Citations by year
2025: 17 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 8
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Keywords
differentiable architecture search, DART, adversarial attacks, generalization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review