Context
All current DST algorithm comparisons (SET vs RigL vs Static) run on MNIST. CIFAR-10 is the next standard benchmark and is where the RigL paper shows its advantage over SET most clearly.
What needs to happen
- Write
examples/demo_17_cifar10.py following the pattern of demo_11_rigl_vs_set_vs_static.py.
- Use a simple CNN or ResNet-20 (not an MLP — CIFAR needs convolutions to be meaningful). The
SparseLinear layers would replace the fully-connected layers; conv layers stay dense for v0.1.
- Compare Static vs SET(0.1) vs RigL(0.1) at 90% sparsity on the FC layers.
- Report accuracy and training curves.
Notes
- CIFAR-10 downloads via
torchvision.datasets.CIFAR10 — same pattern as MNIST in demo_05.
- This is a good first issue because the infrastructure (SparsityAlgorithm, SparseLinear, training loop pattern) all exists. You're writing a new demo script, not new library code.
Files to read
examples/demo_11_rigl_vs_set_vs_static.py — the MNIST version to use as a template
examples/demo_05_mnist.py — data loading pattern
Context
All current DST algorithm comparisons (SET vs RigL vs Static) run on MNIST. CIFAR-10 is the next standard benchmark and is where the RigL paper shows its advantage over SET most clearly.
What needs to happen
examples/demo_17_cifar10.pyfollowing the pattern ofdemo_11_rigl_vs_set_vs_static.py.SparseLinearlayers would replace the fully-connected layers; conv layers stay dense for v0.1.Notes
torchvision.datasets.CIFAR10— same pattern as MNIST in demo_05.Files to read
examples/demo_11_rigl_vs_set_vs_static.py— the MNIST version to use as a templateexamples/demo_05_mnist.py— data loading pattern