SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2309.15698

Deep Model Fusion: A Survey

Abstract

Deep model fusion/merging is an emerging technique that merges the parameters or predictions of multiple deep learning models into a single one. It combines the abilities of different models to make up for the biases and errors of a single model to achieve better performance. However, deep model fusion on large-scale deep learning models (e.g., LLMs and foundation models) faces several challenges, including high computational cost, high-dimensional parameter space, interference between different heterogeneous models, etc. Although model fusion has attracted widespread attention due to its potential to solve complex real-world tasks, there is still a lack of complete and detailed survey research on this technique. Accordingly, in order to understand the model fusion method better and promote its development, we present a comprehensive survey to summarize the recent progress. Specifically, we categorize existing deep model fusion methods as four-fold: (1) "Mode connectivity", which connects the solutions in weight space via a path of non-increasing loss, in order to obtain better initialization for model fusion; (2) "Alignment" matches units between neural networks to create better conditions for fusion; (3) "Weight average", a classical model fusion method, averages the weights of multiple models to obtain more accurate results closer to the optimal solution; (4) "Ensemble learning" combines the outputs of diverse models, which is a foundational technique for improving the accuracy and robustness of the final model. In addition, we analyze the challenges faced by deep model fusion and propose possible research directions for model fusion in the future. Our review is helpful in deeply understanding the correlation between different model fusion methods and practical application methods, which can enlighten the research in the field of deep model fusion.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Weishi Li, Yong Peng, Miao Zhang, Liang Ding, Han Hu, Li Shen. 2023-09-27. Deep Model Fusion: A Survey. https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.15698

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG