The NAS Problem Formulation: Search Space, Search Strategy, and Performance Estimation
Neural Architecture Search (NAS) automates the design of neural network architectures. To effectively implement NAS, we must precisely define the problem by specifying three key components: the search space, the search strategy, and the performance estimation strategy.
1. The Search Space: Defining the Design Universe
The search space is the set of all possible neural network architectures that the NAS algorithm can explore. A well-defined search space is crucial for balancing expressiveness (ability to represent good architectures) and tractability (computational feasibility of searching).
2. The Search Strategy: Navigating the Design Landscape
The search strategy is the algorithm used to explore the defined search space and identify promising architectures. This strategy guides the search process, aiming to efficiently find architectures that perform well on a given task.
| Strategy Type | Description | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|---|
| Random Search | Randomly samples architectures from the search space. | Simple to implement, can be surprisingly effective. | Inefficient for large search spaces, no learning from past trials. |
| Reinforcement Learning (RL) | An agent learns a policy to generate architectures, receiving rewards based on performance. | Can learn complex search policies, adaptable. | High computational cost, requires careful reward engineering. |
| Evolutionary Algorithms (EA) | Maintains a population of architectures, using selection, mutation, and crossover to evolve better ones. | Good for exploring diverse architectures, robust. | Can be slow to converge, requires careful hyperparameter tuning. |
| Bayesian Optimization (BO) | Builds a probabilistic model of the architecture's performance and uses it to select promising candidates. | Efficiently explores the search space, good for expensive evaluations. | Can struggle with high-dimensional search spaces. |
| Gradient-based Methods | Uses gradient descent to optimize architecture parameters within a continuous relaxation of the search space. | Fast and efficient, can be integrated with standard training. | Requires differentiable search spaces, can get stuck in local optima. |
3. The Performance Estimation Strategy: Evaluating Architectures
Evaluating the performance of each candidate architecture is computationally expensive, as it typically involves training the network from scratch. The performance estimation strategy aims to approximate this evaluation efficiently.
The NAS problem can be visualized as a landscape where the x-axis represents the vast search space of possible neural network architectures, and the y-axis represents their performance (e.g., accuracy). The search strategy is the algorithm that navigates this landscape, trying to find the peaks (high-performing architectures). The performance estimation strategy is how we measure the height of each point on the landscape. If we measure every point fully (full training), it's accurate but slow. If we use shortcuts (early stopping, weight sharing), it's faster but might give an approximate height. The goal is to find the highest peaks efficiently.
Text-based content
Library pages focus on text content
Interplay of Components
These three components are deeply interconnected. A complex search space might require a more sophisticated search strategy. Conversely, a very efficient performance estimation strategy can enable the exploration of larger and more diverse search spaces. The ultimate goal is to find a balance that allows for the discovery of novel, high-performing architectures within practical computational constraints.
The three fundamental components are the Search Space, the Search Strategy, and the Performance Estimation Strategy.
The search space defines the set of all possible architectures that can be discovered, balancing expressiveness (ability to represent good architectures) with tractability (computational feasibility of searching).
Two common types are Reinforcement Learning (RL) and Evolutionary Algorithms (EA). Other examples include Random Search, Bayesian Optimization, and Gradient-based Methods.
The primary challenge is the computational expense of fully training and evaluating each candidate architecture. The strategy aims to approximate this evaluation efficiently.
Learning Resources
A comprehensive survey covering the problem formulation, search spaces, search strategies, and performance estimation techniques in NAS.
Introduces a benchmark dataset for NAS that allows for efficient and reproducible evaluation of search strategies and search spaces.
A seminal paper introducing a gradient-based NAS method that significantly speeds up the search process by relaxing the discrete search space.
Proposes a method for NAS that uses a shared parameter space to reduce the computational cost of evaluating architectures.
Provides a broad overview of AutoML, with a significant section dedicated to Neural Architecture Search and its formulation.
An accessible introduction to NAS from Google, explaining the core concepts and applications.
Discusses the concept of using machine learning to design neural networks, touching upon the search space and strategy aspects.
While not solely on NAS, this chapter discusses best practices for machine learning projects, which are relevant to formulating and executing NAS tasks.
An introductory article explaining the problem formulation and common approaches in NAS in an easy-to-understand manner.
A platform that links research papers to their code implementations, providing a practical overview of current NAS research and methods.