Evaluates the test accuracy of single-shot pruning methods at initialization on image classification tasks. It measures how well a pruned sub-network can be trained and generalizes compared to baselines like SNIP and random pruning. Use when the user wants to benchmark on CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, Tiny-ImageNet, ImageNet, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports test accuracy.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill grasp-pruning-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Grasp Pruning Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-grasp-pruning-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: grasp-pruning-eval
description: Evaluates the test accuracy of single-shot pruning methods at initialization on image classification tasks. It measures how well a pruned sub-network can be trained and generalizes compared to baselines like SNIP and random pruning. Use when the user wants to benchmark on CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, Tiny-ImageNet, ImageNet, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports test accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2002.07376
bibtex_key: wang2020grasp
confidence: high
---
# grasp-pruning-eval
> Picking Winning Tickets Before Training by Preserving Gradient Flow — Wang et al. (2020) (arXiv:2002.07376, 2020)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates the test accuracy of single-shot pruning methods at initialization on image classification tasks. It measures how well a pruned sub-network can be trained and generalizes compared to baselines like SNIP and random pruning.
## Datasets
- **CIFAR-10** — total ?; splits: train (-1), test (-1)
- **CIFAR-100** — total ?; splits: train (-1), test (-1)
- **Tiny-ImageNet** — total ?; splits: train (-1), test (-1)
- **ImageNet** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1)
## Metrics
- `test accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Percentage of correctly classified images on the held-out test set. For ImageNet, both top-1 and top-5 accuracy are reported.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Image classification dataset (images and labels) with a specified neural network architecture (e.g., VGG, ResNet) and a target pruning ratio.
**Output**: A binary mask indicating which weights to keep/prune, followed by the trained pruned network's test accuracy on the evaluation split.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_test_accuracy(predictions, gold_labels):
correct = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, gold_labels) if p == g)
return (correct / len(gold_labels)) * 100
```
## Common pitfalls
- Pruning is performed at initialization, so gradients must be computed on the untrained model before any weight updates.
- Results are averaged over multiple trials (3 for CIFAR/Tiny-ImageNet, 10 for gradient norm analysis) to account for initialization variance.
- High sparsity levels (e.g., 90%+) often lead to underfitting, making convergence speed and gradient norm preservation critical factors.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> To evaluate the effectiveness of GraSP on real world tasks, we test GraSP on four image classification datasets, CIFAR-10/100, Tiny-ImageNet and ImageNet, with two modern network architectures, VGGNet and ResNet... The test accuracy is reported in Table 1... We run each experiment for 3 trials for obtaining more stable results.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{wang2020grasp,
title={Picking Winning Tickets Before Training by Preserving Gradient Flow},
author={Wang et al. (2020)},
year={2020},
note={arXiv:2002.07376}
}
```
- arXiv: 2002.07376
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!