<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Sparse Training | Yik Yu Ng</title><link>https://yyn-anson.github.io/tags/sparse-training/</link><atom:link href="https://yyn-anson.github.io/tags/sparse-training/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><description>Sparse Training</description><generator>Hugo Blox Builder (https://hugoblox.com)</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Parameter-Efficient Reinforcement Learning via Dynamic Sparse Training</title><link>https://yyn-anson.github.io/project/rl_a2c_dapd/</link><pubDate>Sun, 08 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://yyn-anson.github.io/project/rl_a2c_dapd/</guid><description>&lt;h1 id="enhancing-a2c-with-dapd-across-classic-control-and-atari-environments">Enhancing A2C with DAPD across Classic Control and Atari Environments&lt;/h1>
&lt;p>&lt;em>1 Oct 2024 – 10 Dec 2024&lt;/em>&lt;/p>
&lt;h2 id="project-overview">Project Overview&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>This project investigates parameter-efficient reinforcement learning through the integration of Dynamic Sparse Training with Pathways (DAPD) into the Advantage Actor-Critic (A2C) algorithm. We compare A2C+DAPD against standard dense A2C and Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) across three benchmark environments—LunarLander-v2, Breakout, and Pong—to evaluate trade-offs between computational efficiency and learning reliability.&lt;/p>
&lt;h2 id="full-report">Full Report&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>Access the full details about the project and result on the
.&lt;/p>
&lt;h2 id="presentation">Presentation&lt;/h2>
&lt;iframe
src="https://1drv.ms/v/c/891814256f52dec4/IQR9BlTeSsQdQ7ZWnndV-xzfATA8fk1T9Z-vk3O7rcD_LRk"
width="720"
height="540"
frameborder="0"
scrolling="no"
allowfullscreen>
&lt;/iframe>
&lt;h2 id="objectives">Objectives&lt;/h2>
&lt;ul>
&lt;li>Assess the impact of DAPD on A2C’s training speed and parameter footprint.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>Compare performance and stability of sparse and dense agents across classic and visual control tasks.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>Derive empirical insights into the trade-offs inherent in dynamic sparse training within RL.&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul>
&lt;h2 id="technical-approach">Technical Approach&lt;/h2>
&lt;ul>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>A2C&lt;/strong>: Advantage Actor-Critic with actor and critic networks sharing a two-layer feed-forward architecture (64 ReLU units), optimized via Adam.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>PPO&lt;/strong>: Dense baseline using a clipped objective for enhanced stability and sample efficiency.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>A2C+DAPD&lt;/strong>: Incorporates a binary mask to maintain 90% sparsity, updating prune–regrow operations periodically (every 1,000 steps for LunarLander; 100,000 for Atari).&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul>
&lt;p>Agents are trained for 10,000 episodes in each environment, recording episodic rewards, average performance over the last 100 episodes, and wall-clock training time. Reward curves are smoothed using a 100-episode moving average.&lt;/p>
&lt;h2 id="experiments">Experiments&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>We evaluate:&lt;/p>
&lt;ul>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>LunarLander-v2&lt;/strong>: Classic control task, low-dimensional state space.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>Breakout &amp;amp; Pong&lt;/strong>: Visual environments from the Atari suite.&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul>
&lt;p>Key findings:&lt;/p>
&lt;ul>
&lt;li>DAPD reduces wall-clock training time by approximately 30–40%, converging in ~8,000–14,000 seconds versus ~14,000–25,000 seconds for dense A2C.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>Sparse training introduces significant variance and instability, particularly in control tasks.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>PPO consistently outperforms both A2C variants in final reward and stability across all environments.&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul>
&lt;h2 id="outcomes-and-future-work">Outcomes and Future Work&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>Our results highlight the computational advantages of dynamic sparse training at the expense of convergence reliability. While DAPD accelerates early learning, its instability underscores the need for sparsity-aware optimization strategies. Future directions include:&lt;/p>
&lt;ul>
&lt;li>Thorough evaluation of the Policy Pruning and Shrinking (PoPS) method.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>Exploration of structured sparsity, adaptive pruning schedules, and hybrid dense–sparse models.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>Deployment studies on resource-constrained hardware for real-time applications.&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul></description></item></channel></rss>