QuaNAS: Uncertainty-Aware Reuse of Earlier Searches for Query-Efficient Neural Architecture Search
Organizations: Department of Informatics, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya, Indonesia · Department of Information Technology, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya, Indonesia · Department of Electrical Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya, Indonesia
Abstract
Neural architecture search (NAS) on a new dataset often affords only tens of short training runs, so what the search knows before its first evaluation decides its efficiency. Yet most NAS methods start from scratch, guided at best by zero-cost proxies that are unreliable across tasks. QuaNAS treats a library of earlier searches in the same search space as explicit knowledge of uncertain reliability. Main effects of design decisions learned from this library and, secondarily, zero-cost proxies become priors over candidate architectures without any label of the new dataset. A Gaussian process starts at the prior optimum and re-estimates after every evaluation how far each prior is trusted. Under a protocol frozen before any confirmation data were seen, QuaNAS was evaluated once on 12 new image, time-series, text and tabular datasets. It lowered anytime regret on the short-training objective 2.7- to 3.9-fold relative to five pre-specified NAS baselines that start from scratch (Holm-adjusted p = 0.0012 each). Its final models matched (non-inferiority margin 0.5 pp) or exceeded matched-recipe reference models on nine datasets, as did the prior optimum, selected without a single evaluation. Post-hoc comparisons with established transfer methods given the same library trace the gain to the library: without it, the same Gaussian process had over twice the regret. They also show where each transfer mechanism works best: the pooled main effects of QuaNAS for weakly transferable tabular tasks, per-task surrogates for image, time-series and text tasks and for small or mismatched libraries. Finally, the main effects make the transferred knowledge inspectable.
Figures & tables
| Method | Proxies | Earlier tasks | Online re-weighting | Task representation needed | Data in the original work |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| REA ( Real et al., 2019 ) , LS ( White et al., 2021b ) | – | none | image benchmarks | ||
| BANANAS ( White et al., 2021a ) | – | none | image benchmarks | ||
| ProxyBO ( Shen et al., 2023 ) | ✓ | ✓ | none | image benchmarks | |
| RoBoT ( He et al., 2024 ) | ✓ | ✓ | none | image benchmarks | |
| Warm-start BO ( Feurer et al., 2015 ) (HPO) | ✓ | dataset meta-features | hyperparameter benchmarks | ||
| RGPE ( Feurer et al., 2018 ) (HPO) | ✓ | ✓ | none | hyperparameter benchmarks |
| Symbol | Meaning |
|---|---|
| , , | architecture, number of decisions, options of decision |
| , , | candidate pool of the new task, its size, query budget (100) |
| , | low-fidelity validation accuracy and its training cost |
| , | library of earlier tasks in the same space, one library task |
| rank-normal transform (ranks mapped to normal quantiles) | |
| , | architecture prior (from ) and proxy prior |
| Dataset | Input | Classes | Train / val. / test | Pool | Short | Full | Stability |
| Image (space: conv, library of 15 earlier pools) | |||||||
| OCTMNIST † ( Yang et al., 2023 ) | 4 | 97,477 / 10,832 / 1,000 | 600 | 3 (20k) | 15 | 0.81 | |
| TissueMNIST ( Yang et al., 2023 ) | 8 | 165,466 / 23,640 / 47,280 | 600 | 3 (20k) | 10 | 0.89 | |
| EMNIST-Balanced ( Cohen et al., 2017 ) | 47 | 101,520 / 11,280 / 18,800 | 600 | 3 (20k) | 15 | 0.96 | |
| Imagenette-32 ( Howard, 2019 ) | 10 | 8,523 / 946 / 3,925 | 600 | 5 | 60 | 0.65 | |
| Time series (space: conv, library of 15 earlier pools) | |||||||
| Fidelity | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dataset | (%) | Best proxy | Worst | Val. | Test | |
| OCTMNIST | 90.36 | 1.43 | 0.54 (NASWOT) | 0.08 | 0.10 | 0.15 |
| TissueMNIST | 61.99 | 2.25 | 0.52 (SNIP) | 0.27 | 0.30 | 0.50 |
| EMNIST-Balanced | 88.98 | 1.06 | 0.55 (SNIP) | 0.24 | 0.67 | 0.67 |
| Imagenette-32 | 77.91 | 6.03 | 0.44 (NASWOT) | 0.08 | 0.20 | 0.20 |
| ElectricDevices | 91.34 | 2.17 | 0.31 (NASWOT) | 0.26 | 0.43 | 0.63 |
| QuaNAS | RoBoT-style | PTK-MR | QIEA-ZC | REA | LS | RS | |
| Anytime regret (AUC, lower is better) | |||||||
| OCTMNIST | 0.000 | 0.130 | 0.056 | 0.098 | 0.185 | 0.180 | 0.247 |
| TissueMNIST | 0.010 | 0.208 | 0.114 | 0.149 | 0.249 | 0.241 | 0.298 |
| EMNIST-Balanced | 0.021 | 0.068 | 0.023 | 0.079 | 0.107 | 0.108 | 0.143 |
| Imagenette-32 | 0.000 | 0.321 | 0.152 | 0.187 | 0.281 | 0.237 | 0.320 |
| ElectricDevices | 0.032 | 0.103 | 0.058 | 0.163 | 0.225 | 0.228 | 0.280 |
| Confirmation (12 held-out datasets) | Development (35 pools) | ||||||||||
| Method | AUC | Median | CVaR 0.2 | Neg. | AUC [95% CI] | W/T/L | Holm | TTT 0.05 (s) | AUC | CVaR 0.2 | Neg. |
| QuaNAS | 0.058 | 0.034 | 0.151 | 0 | – | – | – | 197 | 0.075 | 0.208 | 2 |
| RGPE ( Feurer et al., 2018 ) | 0.058 | 0.020 | 0.174 | 1 | 0.000 [ 0.012, 0.013] | 3/6/3 | 0.62 | 146 | 0.086 | 0.274 | 5 |
| WS-GP ( Feurer et al., 2015 ) | 0.075 | 0.050 | 0.154 | 1 | 0.017 [ 0.003, 0.040] | 5/4/3 | 0.38 | 180 | 0.097 | 0.296 | 5 |
| NT (nearest task) | 0.108 | 0.058 | 0.291 | 2 | 0.050 [0.005, 0.112] | 6/6/0 | 0.028 | 262 | 0.160 | 0.457 | 11 |
| GP-BO (no transfer) | 0.130 | 0.120 | 0.208 | – | 0.072 [0.044, 0.101] | 11/1/0 | 0.0020 | 299 | 0.154 | 0.300 | – |
| Development (35 pools) | Confirmation (12 held-out datasets) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Removed component | AUC | worst | AUC | worst | ||||
| QuaNAS (full configuration) | 0.075 | – | – | – | 0.058 | – | – | – |
| architecture prior (mean and kernel) | 0.100 | 0.026 | 0.165 | 0.013 | 0.099 | 0.041 | 0.184 | 0.019 |
| proxy prior (no proxy computed) | 0.089 | 0.014 | 0.193 | 0.99 | 0.079 | 0.021 | 0.133 | 0.13 |
| online re-weighting ( ) | 0.095 | 0.021 | 0.271 | 0.99 | 0.056 | 0.002 | 0.028 | 1.00 |
| Hamming kernel ( ) | 0.151 | 0.076 | 0.285 | 0.109 | 0.051 | 0.128 | 0.0049 | |
| CIFAR-10 | CIFAR-100 | ImageNet16-120 | Mean | ||||
| Method | AUC | Acc.@25 | AUC | Acc.@25 | AUC | Acc.@25 | AUC |
| QuaNAS | 0.060 | 94.00 | 0.025 | 73.18 | 0.063 | 46.07 | 0.049 |
| RGPE | 0.001 | 94.36 | 0.003 | 73.24 | 0.001 | 47.33 | 0.002 |
| WS-GP | 0.008 | 94.36 | 0.011 | 73.10 | 0.011 | 47.20 | 0.010 |
| NT | 0.001 | 94.36 | 0.002 | 73.24 | 0.001 | 47.33 | 0.002 |
| GP-BO | 0.140 | 93.77 | 0.125 | 72.05 | 0.118 | 45.74 | 0.128 |
| Dataset | Reference | Reference acc. | QuaNAS acc. | (pp) | Outcome | Size ratio | CPU latency (ms) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OCTMNIST | ResNet-18 | 78.47 1.16 | 77.58 0.87 | 0.89 | not met | 0.04 | 7.14 / 1.53 |
| TissueMNIST | ResNet-18 | 72.26 0.11 | 72.95 0.07 | 0.69 | superior | 0.15 | 7.09 / 2.76 |
| EMNIST-Balanced | ResNet-18 | 91.02 0.07 | 90.96 0.09 | 0.06 | non-inferior | 0.11 | 7.15 / 1.95 |
| Imagenette-32 | ResNet-18 | 83.96 0.35 | 85.47 0.34 | 1.51 | superior | 0.03 | 7.96 / 2.61 |
| ElectricDevices | ResNet1D-18 | 71.47 0.61 | 72.00 0.76 | 0.53 | non-inferior | 0.14 | 2.10 / 0.80 |
| FetalECG | ResNet1D-18 | 92.41 0.50 | 93.94 0.43 | 1.54 | superior | 0.29 | 4.79 / 4.78 |
| Zero-query transfer | Light model (capped search) | |||||||
| Dataset | QuaNAS | RoBoT-style | Non-inf. | Not worse | (pp) | Size ratio | Latency ratio | All met |
| OCTMNIST | 0.49 | 0.81 | – | ✓ | 0.89 | 0.04 | 0.21 | – |
| TissueMNIST | 0.76 | 0.48 | ✓ | ✓ | 0.49 | 0.08 | 0.35 | ✓ |
| EMNIST-Balanced | 0.03 | 0.01 | ✓ | ✓ | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.27 | ✓ |
| Imagenette-32 | 1.21 | 2.29 | ✓ | ✓ | 1.51 | 0.03 | 0.33 | ✓ |
| ElectricDevices | 1.20 | 1.08 | ✓ | ✓ | 1.24 | 0.12 | 0.41 | ✓ |
| Hypothesis | Criterion fixed before the confirmation | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Search efficiency | AUC lower than each primary comparator (Holm ) and best mean Friedman rank | Supported: Holm for all five; mean rank 1.08 of 14 |
| Speed | TTT 0.05 lower than each primary comparator (Holm ) | Supported: Holm |
| Final model | superior or non-inferior (margin 0.5 pp) to the reference on at least 7 of 12 datasets | Supported: 9 of 12 (7 superior) |
| Components | lowest mean AUC among the full method and six removals, and no removal significantly better | Partly supported: no removal better (Holm ); fixed weights 0.056 versus 0.058 |
| Light models | search rule in the capped pools; capped model non-inferior, at most one third of the reference size and faster on CPU on at least 7 of 12 | Partly supported: search rule met (Holm ); model criterion on 5 of 12 |
| Zero-query transfer | prior optimum non-inferior to the reference on at least 7 of 12 and not worse than RoBoT-style transfer on at least 7 of 12 | Supported: 9 and 11 of 12 |
Appendix figures & tables2 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Library | QuaNAS | RGPE | WS-GP | NT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All 21 pools | ||||
| Full library | 0.043 (1) | 0.034 (0) | 0.064 (0) | 0.083 (3) |
| Other data type only | 0.108 (6) | 0.061 (1) | 0.089 (3) | 0.235 (15) |
| Scrambled labels | 0.120 (5) | 0.164 (12) | 0.141 (9) | 0.279 (16) |
| One random earlier search | 0.103 (3) | 0.080 (0) | 0.088 (0) | 0.120 (5) |
| Two random earlier searches | 0.073 (2) | 0.055 (0) | 0.080 (1) | 0.093 (3) |
| Method or variant | Mean AUC | Median | 90th pct. | NAS-Bench-201 |
| QuaNAS | 0.070 | 0.036 | 0.172 | 0.049 |
| RGPE | 0.079 | 0.030 | 0.211 | 0.002 |
| Oracle: better of the two per pool | 0.056 | 0.030 | 0.149 | – |
| surrogate + main-effect prior, per-task random effects | 0.084 | 0.034 | 0.260 | 0.008 |
| surrogate prior only | 0.091 | 0.039 | 0.329 | 0.007 |
| one random effect on the surrogate mean | 0.076 | 0.037 | 0.197 | 0.004 |
Neural Architecture Search
Neural Architecture Search automates neural network design for target tasks, resource budgets, and hardware constraints.
See all 130 papers