SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2504.04342

Pruning Laws for Large Language Models

Abstract

Scaling up model parameters and training data consistently improves the performance of large language models (LLMs), but at the cost of rapidly growing memory and compute requirements, which makes deployment on resource-limited hardware infeasible. Model pruning, a widely used compression technique, reduces inference costs by removing redundant parameters. However, its impact on downstream performance remains unpredictable and is typically assessed only through costly empirical sweeps. To address this gap, we introduce pruning laws, simple and interpretable scaling relations that connect a pruned LLM's post-pruning performance to its unpruned performance and pruning ratio. Across ten LLMs (1.3B-30B parameters), a 20B mixture-of-experts model, three pruning strategies (unstructured, width, and depth), and eight diverse tasks, we show that pruning laws achieve strong predictive accuracy (average extrapolation error less than 7%), reliably quantify performance degradation, and identify critical pruning thresholds beyond which recovery is infeasible. Moreover, we demonstrate that the functional form transfers across dense and mixture-of-experts architectures, pruning methods, and unseen models in zero-shot and one-shot setups, with task- and method-specific coefficients that vary in interpretable ways. These results provide both researchers and practitioners with a principled framework to select pruning strategies, estimate safe pruning ratios without exhaustive tuning, and deploy LLMs efficiently under real-world compute and latency constraints.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Ayan Sengupta, Siddhant Chaudhary, Tanmoy Chakraborty. 2026-08-27. Pruning Laws for Large Language Models. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.04342

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

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related discoveries

Informational Antilocality and the Locality Bias in LLMs

We consider the ability of transformer-based language models (LLMs) to learn what we call k-antilocal languages, i.e., languages that have no mutual information across any span of $k$ contiguous symbols. We construct such languages with increasing $k$, finding that LLMs trained on them achieve comparable cross-entropy loss regardless of antilocality, but converge more slowly on more antilocal languages. Our findings support the idea that non-local dependencies are more difficult to learn, but the evidence for this bias comes from learning speed rather than learning success.

cs.CL

Sleight of Word Benchmark: Can Language Models Notice If Their Own Output Was Tampered With?

The output of a Language Model can be tampered with \emph{while} the model is writing it. A simple test can thus be constructed by evaluating the model's perception of this external perturbation. In this spirit, a simple benchmark is built in which a single word is consistently substituted with another in the generation process. We call this method \emph{Sleight of Word}. Two distinct axes are measured: metrics that relate to the model's surprise, as well as an evaluation of the textual reaction for 19 different open-weight language models.

cs.CL

Do LLM Agents Mirror Socio-Cognitive Effects in Power-Asymmetric Conversations?

Power differences shape human communication through well documented socio cognitive effects, including language coordination, pronoun usage, authority bias, and harmful compliance. We examine whether large language models (LLMs) exhibit similar behaviors when assigned high or low status personas. Using personas from diverse professions, we simulate multi turn, power asymmetric dialogues (e.g., principal teacher, justice lawyer) and measure (i) language coordination, (ii) pronoun usage, (iii) persuasion success, and (iv) compliance with unsafe requests. Our results show that LLMs show key socio-cognitive effects of power, albeit with nuances and variability, linking simulated interactions to both desirable and unsafe behaviors.

cs.CL