Sparse routing reduces per-token computation but leaves the full expert bank resident in memory. We study expert pruning for speech-centric omni-modal models, where pooling calibration statistics can obscure the different expert demands of acoustic-input processing and text-answer generation. We propose PW-Pruning, a phase-aware extension of DO-ACP that constructs separate importance-weighted kernels for acoustic-prefill and teacher-forced answer tokens, then combines phase-weighted log-determinant marginal gains to select one static expert bank. On Qwen3-Omni, retaining 32 of 128 experts per layer improves MMAU-mini and MMSU accuracy over matched pooled selection by 3.20 and 4.38 percentage points, respectively, after supervised fine-tuning, averaged over three runs. Single-phase and shuffled-label controls on this public backbone suggest that semantic phase information contributes to these gains. Experiments on a non-public Qwen3.5-Omni backbone and English-only zero-shot evaluation of Nemotron provide complementary evidence. Across the tested Qwen budgets, AU gains are larger under stronger pruning, without inference-time mask switching.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: From phase demand to one static mask. Qwen3-Omni: (a) audio-prefill/teacher-forced-answer frequency-mask Jaccard. Legends: means; shading: last eight layers; dotted: B/(2E−B) cardinality guides. (b) Actual E32 mask assignment coverage, task/layer macro-averaged on calibration. (c) Phase-wise selection. E: experts per MoE layer; normalized depth.
Figure 2: Phase-semantics recovery on Qwen3-Omni, E32 . All methods use the same expert budget and SFT schedule. Final Pooled/PW error bars show three-run sample s.d. (Table 1 ); mean control endpoints are listed in Table 2 .
Selector
MMAU ↑
MMAR ↑
MMSU ↑
Qwen3-Omni, E32 (Fig. 2 )
Shuffled-PW
63.21
50.20
53.20
Audio-only
64.72
50.95
53.36
Answer-only
61.96
52.95
53.59
Qwen3.5-Omni, 4× reduction
Pooled
70.40
62.60
66.02
Table 2: Phase-semantics ablation. Mean AU accuracy (%) across recovery runs at SFT step 1,024. Qwen3-Omni E32 Pooled/PW: Table 1 ; Qwen3.5-Omni 4× Pooled/PW: same means as Table 3 . Bold: highest mean per column in the Qwen3.5-Omni block.
R
Selector
CV-W ↓
CV-C ↓
LS ↓
OCP ↓
BLEU ↑
MMAU ↑
MMAR ↑
MMSU ↑
1×
Teacher
5.68
5.70
2.26
1.06
30.72
78.50
73.60
71.10
2×
Pooled
9.67 ± .04
8.77 ± .28
3.01 ± .00
2.10 ± .03
26.14 ± .25
75.70 ± .36
70.40 ± .26
69.83 ± .21
2×
PW
9.96 ± .15
8.76 ± .48
3.05 ± .03
2.64 ± .57
25.89 ± .03
76.20 ± .62
70.17 ± .71
69.49 ± .44
4×
Pooled
16.48 ± .22
14.75 ± .20
5.04 ± .11
5.22 ± .77
12.81 ± .23
70.40 ± .14
62.60 ± .57
66.02 ± .42
4×
PW
14.34 ± .48
14.73 ± 1.08
4.66 ± .08
4.52 ± .41
13.65 ± .24
72.50 ± .71
63.05 ± 1.06
66.45 ± .47
Table 3: Transfer to Qwen3.5-Omni. A non-public research backbone; budgets are relative to the unpruned model. Matched SFT recovery: mean ± sample s.d. across repeated runs. Metrics follow Table 1 . Bold: better mean within each Pooled/PW pair.
Budget
Selector
En-WER ↓
MMAU ↑
MMAR ↑
MMSU ↑
E128
Teacher
3.378
77.60
60.70
62.60
E64
Pooled
4.173
75.00
58.50
60.00
E64
PW
4.002
74.30
59.10
61.08
E32
Pooled
5.535
69.50
52.10
50.58
E32
PW
4.797
69.50
52.50
52.54
Table 4: Zero-shot Nemotron transfer. English-subset public ASR WER and AU accuracy (%); E: retained experts. No recovery; bold: better Pooled/PW score.
Figure 3: Deployment savings. H20, batch 1: (a) peak memory relative to the unpruned model; (b) real-time factor. Savings reflect expert budget, not PW-specific speedups.
Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models reduce computation through sparse expert activation, but deployment still requires storing a large number of expert parameters. We study post-training expert pruning using task-domain calibration data as a subset-selection problem: given a pretrained MoE layer, select a fixed number of experts that best reconstruct its original output. Exact subset search is combinatorial and becomes intractable for modern MoE models with many experts per layer. We develop OptEP, a scalable continuous relaxation that directly optimizes differentiable expert-selection variables, followed by a lightweight reconstruction-based update of the retained expert weights. Across multiple MoE architectures and tasks spanning mathematical reasoning and code generation, our approach improves over the strongest existing expert-pruning baselines, with absolute accuracy gains of up to 15.05% on Qwen3-30B-A3B, 14.55% on Qwen3-235B-A22B, 11.06% on GLM-4.5-Air, and 16.20% on Mixtral-8x7B. The improvements are particularly pronounced under aggressive pruning, demonstrating that reconstruction-driven expert selection and weight adaptation can preserve substantially more of the original model's performance while reducing the number of retained experts.
Jelena Markovic-Voronov, Petros Prastakos, Kayhan Behdin +7
Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architectures scale model capacity efficiently, yet their substantial memory footprint poses a major barrier to deployment. Expert pruning reduces this footprint, but most methods focus on which experts to remove and prune every layer equally. We propose SPARE (Sparsity Allocation via Routing Entropy), a training-free, selector-agnostic method that decides how many experts to remove from each layer using routing entropy, the entropy of tokens' normalized Top-K gate weights on calibration data. When a token's gate weight is spread evenly, removing one active expert discards little of it, so SPARE prunes layers with more diffuse routing more aggressively. A perturbation bound under random pruning formalizes this intuition, and controlled interventions with a fixed selector link concentrated routing to larger output changes. With the same selector and budget, SPARE improves average accuracy over uniform allocation on Mixtral, Qwen3, and DeepSeek models, especially at high pruning ratios. At 50% expert pruning, it raises the eight-task average of Qwen3-30B-A3B from 57.2% to 63.8%, and the math, code, and science average of DeepSeek-R1 from 80.1 to 82.8.
Sparsely activated Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) language models contain substantial structured redundancy among routed experts, but pruning them without downstream calibration data remains challenging. Existing expert-pruning methods typically rely on a single aggregated importance score, which can bias the retained set toward experts favored by dominant calibration patterns. We propose Generic TB-Coverage, a coverage-aware expert pruning method that uses only generic text corpora (WikiText2 and C4) for calibration. Instead of collapsing expert utility into one score, our method profiles per-expert utility separately on each corpus and enforces a fixed-budget coverage rule that preserves high-utility experts from each corpus before constructing the final pruning mask. Across Qwen1.5-MoE-A2.7B and DeepSeek-MoE-16B-Base at 25%, 50%, and 75% retention budgets, our method improves average accuracy on six common zero-shot benchmarks over random pruning, REAP, and ExpertSparsity, while also reducing perplexity degradation on WikiText2 and C4. The gains are largest under aggressive pruning (25% and 50% retain), suggesting that preserving cross-corpus expert coverage is an effective generic-data prior for MoE pruning. Our improvements hold with fixed pruning budgets and no downstream calibration data.