Downsized and Compromised?: Assessing the Faithfulness of Model Compression

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.06125v1
• Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2025 17:05:02 GMT
• Title: Downsized and Compromised?: Assessing the Faithfulness of Model Compression
• Authors: Moumita Kamal, Douglas A. Talbert,
• Abstract summary: This paper presents a novel approach to evaluating faithfulness in compressed models, moving beyond standard metrics.<n>We introduce and demonstrate a set of faithfulness metrics that capture how model behavior changes post-compression.<n>Our contributions include introducing techniques to assess predictive consistency between the original and compressed models using model agreement, and applying chi-squared tests to detect statistically significant changes in predictive patterns across both the overall dataset and demographic subgroups.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: In real-world applications, computational constraints often require transforming large models into smaller, more efficient versions through model compression. While these techniques aim to reduce size and computational cost without sacrificing performance, their evaluations have traditionally focused on the trade-off between size and accuracy, overlooking the aspect of model faithfulness. This limited view is insufficient for high-stakes domains like healthcare, finance, and criminal justice, where compressed models must remain faithful to the behavior of their original counterparts. This paper presents a novel approach to evaluating faithfulness in compressed models, moving beyond standard metrics. We introduce and demonstrate a set of faithfulness metrics that capture how model behavior changes post-compression. Our contributions include introducing techniques to assess predictive consistency between the original and compressed models using model agreement, and applying chi-squared tests to detect statistically significant changes in predictive patterns across both the overall dataset and demographic subgroups, thereby exposing shifts that aggregate fairness metrics may obscure. We demonstrate our approaches by applying quantization and pruning to artificial neural networks (ANNs) trained on three diverse and socially meaningful datasets. Our findings show that high accuracy does not guarantee faithfulness, and our statistical tests detect subtle yet significant shifts that are missed by standard metrics, such as Accuracy and Equalized Odds. The proposed metrics provide a practical and more direct method for ensuring that efficiency gains through compression do not compromise the fairness or faithfulness essential for trustworthy AI.

Related papers

• Enhancing Trustworthiness with Mixed Precision: Benchmarks, Opportunities, and Challenges [12.438306093697]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown promising performance across various tasks.<n>LLMs' autoregressive decoding process poses significant challenges for efficient deployment on existing AI hardware.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-27T14:17:43Z)
• Compressed Models are NOT Trust-equivalent to Their Large Counterparts [0.8124699127636158]
  Large Deep Learning models are often compressed before being deployed in a resource-constrained environment.<n>Can we trust the prediction of compressed models just as we trust the prediction of the original large model?<n>We propose a two-dimensional framework for trust-equivalence evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-19T05:49:39Z)
• Unified Scaling Laws for Compressed Representations [69.72517034565467]
  We investigate whether a unified scaling framework can accurately predict model performance when training occurs over various compressed representations.<n>Our main finding is demonstrating both theoretically and empirically that there exists a simple "capacity" metric.<n>We extend our formulation to directly compare the accuracy potential of different compressed formats, and to derive better algorithms for training over sparse-quantized formats.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-02T16:52:51Z)
• On Large-scale Evaluation of Embedding Models for Knowledge Graph Completion [1.2703808802607108]
  Knowledge graph embedding (KGE) models are extensively studied for knowledge graph completion.<n>Standard evaluation metrics rely on the closed-world assumption, which penalizes models for correctly predicting missing triples.<n>This paper conducts a comprehensive evaluation of four representative KGE models on large-scale datasets FB-CVT-REV and FB+CVT-REV.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-11T20:49:02Z)
• A Conformal Approach to Feature-based Newsvendor under Model Misspecification [2.801095519296785]
  We propose a model-free and distribution-free framework inspired by conformal prediction.<n>We validate our framework using both simulated data and a real-world dataset from the Capital Bikeshare program in Washington, D.C.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-17T18:34:43Z)
• Multiclass Alignment of Confidence and Certainty for Network Calibration [10.15706847741555]
  Recent studies reveal that deep neural networks (DNNs) are prone to making overconfident predictions. We propose a new train-time calibration method, which features a simple, plug-and-play auxiliary loss known as multi-class alignment of predictive mean confidence and predictive certainty (MACC) Our method achieves state-of-the-art calibration performance for both in-domain and out-domain predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-06T00:56:24Z)
• Weak Proxies are Sufficient and Preferable for Fairness with Missing Sensitive Attributes [25.730297492625507]
  We develop an algorithm that is able to measure fairness (provably) accurately with only three properly identified proxies. Our results imply a set of practical guidelines for practitioners on how to use proxies properly.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-06T19:25:29Z)
• Leveraging Unlabeled Data to Predict Out-of-Distribution Performance [63.740181251997306]
  Real-world machine learning deployments are characterized by mismatches between the source (training) and target (test) distributions. In this work, we investigate methods for predicting the target domain accuracy using only labeled source data and unlabeled target data. We propose Average Thresholded Confidence (ATC), a practical method that learns a threshold on the model's confidence, predicting accuracy as the fraction of unlabeled examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-11T23:01:12Z)
• Trust but Verify: Assigning Prediction Credibility by Counterfactual Constrained Learning [123.3472310767721]
  Prediction credibility measures are fundamental in statistics and machine learning. These measures should account for the wide variety of models used in practice. The framework developed in this work expresses the credibility as a risk-fit trade-off.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-24T19:52:38Z)
• Accurate and Robust Feature Importance Estimation under Distribution Shifts [49.58991359544005]
  PRoFILE is a novel feature importance estimation method. We show significant improvements over state-of-the-art approaches, both in terms of fidelity and robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-30T05:29:01Z)
• Unlabelled Data Improves Bayesian Uncertainty Calibration under Covariate Shift [100.52588638477862]
  We develop an approximate Bayesian inference scheme based on posterior regularisation. We demonstrate the utility of our method in the context of transferring prognostic models of prostate cancer across globally diverse populations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-26T13:50:19Z)
• Meta-Learned Confidence for Few-shot Learning [60.6086305523402]
  A popular transductive inference technique for few-shot metric-based approaches, is to update the prototype of each class with the mean of the most confident query examples. We propose to meta-learn the confidence for each query sample, to assign optimal weights to unlabeled queries. We validate our few-shot learning model with meta-learned confidence on four benchmark datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-27T10:22:17Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.