Davide Ferre' | Searcharxiv

arXiv2026

Structured vs. Unstructured Pruning: An Exponential Gap

The Strong Lottery Ticket Hypothesis (SLTH) states that large, randomly initialized neural networks contain sparse subnetworks capable of approximating a target function at initialization without training, suggesting that pruning alone is sufficient. Pruning methods are typically classified as unstructured, where individual weights can be removed from the network, and structured, where parameters are removed according to specific patterns, as in neuron pruning. Existing theoretical results supporting the SLTH rely almost exclusively on unstructured pruning, showing that logarithmic overparameterization suffices to approximate simple target networks. In contrast, neuron pruning has received limited theoretical attention, despite its practical appeal for direct hardware speedups. In this work, we consider the problem of approximating a single bias-free ReLU neuron by pruning hidden units of a randomly initialized two-layer ReLU network, effectively isolating the intrinsic limitations of neuron pruning. We show that achieving an $\varepsilon$-approximation requires a starting network size of $Ω(1/\varepsilon)$ for neuron pruning, whereas weight pruning succeeds with only $O(\log(1/\varepsilon))$ hidden units, revealing an exponential separation between the two approaches.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

On the Sparsity of the Strong Lottery Ticket Hypothesis

Considerable research efforts have recently been made to show that a random neural network $N$ contains subnetworks capable of accurately approximating any given neural network that is sufficiently smaller than $N$, without any training. This line of research, known as the Strong Lottery Ticket Hypothesis (SLTH), was originally motivated by the weaker Lottery Ticket Hypothesis, which states that a sufficiently large random neural network $N$ contains \emph{sparse} subnetworks that can be trained efficiently to achieve performance comparable to that of training the entire network $N$. Despite its original motivation, results on the SLTH have so far not provided any guarantee on the size of subnetworks. Such limitation is due to the nature of the main technical tool leveraged by these results, the Random Subset Sum (RSS) Problem. Informally, the RSS Problem asks how large a random i.i.d. sample $Ω$ should be so that we are able to approximate any number in $[-1,1]$, up to an error of $ ε$, as the sum of a suitable subset of $Ω$. We provide the first proof of the SLTH in classical settings, such as dense and equivariant networks, with guarantees on the sparsity of the subnetworks. Central to our results, is the proof of an essentially tight bound on the Random Fixed-Size Subset Sum Problem (RFSS), a variant of the RSS Problem in which we only ask for subsets of a given size, which is of independent interest.

stat.ML↗