LocalProp: Neuro-Localized Memory-Efficient Backpropagation
Organizations: Department of Computer Science University of Bucharest, Romania
Abstract
The current deep learning training paradigm employs end-to-end backpropagation, regardless of the training stage, i.e. pre-training or fine-tuning. However, backpropagating through the entire model is neither biologically plausible nor memory efficient, since learning inside the brain is highly localized. Therefore, we propose LocalProp, a training procedure that locally updates the weights of a model. Our neuro-localized weight updates follow the "pre-training then fine-tuning" paradigm, where the pre-training is based on I-JEPA. After locally updating the weights, a pruning operation is performed, followed by a short final fine-tuning phase. Pruning helps by sending the learning signal from higher blocks to lower blocks. We perform experiments on several datasets, including large-scale benchmarks such as ImageNet, and empirically show that LocalProp reaches good performance at a fraction of GPU peak memory. By varying the number of jointly optimized blocks, we identify gradient-propagation span as a practical control over the accuracy-memory trade-off.
Figures & tables
| Setting | Local I-JEPA | Pruning | Recovery | Param. factor | ViT-S | ResNet-50 | ||||
| CIFAR-10 | CIFAR-100 | ImageNet-1K | CIFAR-10 | CIFAR-100 | ImageNet-1K | |||||
| Local FT (scratch) | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | 68.63 | 42.53 | 33.29 | 87.75 | 65.31 | 47.36 | |
| LocalProp (no pruning) | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | 76.69 | 50.53 | 37.12 | 89.79 | 67.07 | 55.75 | |
| LocalProp (no recovery) | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | 52.21 | 27.62 | 24.96 | 88.23 | 52.94 | 37.83 | |
| LocalProp | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 75.40 | 47.48 | 34.81 | 88.84 | 67.26 | 52.19 | |
| Local I-JEPA probe | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | 49.46 | 19.16 | 8.27 | 32.80 | 11.09 | 11.89 | |
| Input | Setting | Peak memory | Memory reduction | Top-1 accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIFAR-10 | Full | 3.48 GiB | 0.0% | 87.29% |
| Local (1 block) | 0.69 GiB | 80.2% | 76.69% | |
| ImageNet-1K | Full | 3.40 GiB | 0.0% | 76.87% |
| Local (1 block) | 0.74 GiB | 78.2% | 37.12% |
| Method | Parameter factor | ResNet-50 | ViT-S | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIFAR-10 | CIFAR-100 | ImageNet | CIFAR-10 | CIFAR-100 | ImageNet | ||
| LocalProp (no pruning) | 89.79 | 67.07 | 55.75 | 76.69 | 50.53 | 37.12 | |
| LocalProp | 88.84 | 67.26 | 52.19 | 75.40 | 47.48 | 34.81 | |
| NoProp ( Li et al., 2026 ) | 83.91 | 52.02 | EB | NV | NV | NV | |
| Greedy InfoMax ( Löwe et al., 2019 ) | 72.24 | 41.02 | 3.11 | 42.58 | 15.55 | 18.81 | |
| FF ( Papachristodoulou et al., 2024 ; Sarode et al., 2026 ) | 78.11 | 51.23 | 25.00 | NV | NV | NV | |
| Method | #blocks | TFLOPs | GiB | GPU-h |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Local FT | ||||
| Full FT | ||||
| Reduction | saved |
Appendix figures & tables7 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Hyperparameter | ViT-S/16 | ResNet-50 |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-training epochs | 600 | 200 |
| Optimizer | AdamW | AdamW |
| Learning rate | ||
| Warmup | 40 ep. | 5 ep. |
| Weight decay | ||
| Batch size | 4096 (effective) | 128 |
| Pruning order | Post-pruning | After recovery |
|---|---|---|
| Deepest to shallowest (main) | 88.21% | 88.84% |
| Shallowest to deepest | 88.04% | 89.13% |
| Model | Dataset(s) | Epochs | Batch size | Learning rate | Weight decay | LR schedule | Local Updates |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ViT-S/16 | CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, ImageNet-1K | 120 | 64 | Cosine | 8 updates / block | ||
| ResNet-50 | CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100 | 500 | 64 | Constant | all 14 groups | ||
| ResNet-50 | ImageNet-1K | 500 | 224 | Constant | all 14 groups |
| Hyperparameter | ViT-S/16 | ResNet-50 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| CIFAR | ImageNet | ||
| Pruning unit | Attention heads | Output channels | Output channels |
| Pruning target | 48/72 heads removed | of each width removed | |
| Scoring budget (batches) | 8 | 8 | 8 |
| Recovery budget (epochs) | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Recovery batch size | 64 | 64 | 224 |
| Setting | Seed 0 | Seed 1 | Seed 42 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LocalProp | ||||
| Pruned | ||||
| Recovered | ||||
| Same-mask Scratch |
Local Learning
Local learning develops neural training rules that use nearby activity or layerwise objectives instead of global backpropagated errors.
See all 50 papers