Papers › FairNAS: Rethinking Evaluation Fairness of Weight Sharing Neural Architecture Search

FairNAS: Rethinking Evaluation Fairness of Weight Sharing Neural Architecture Search

3 Jul 2019ICCV 2021 10arXiv:1907.01845archive 2025-07-28

Xiangxiang Chu, Bo Zhang, Ruijun Xu

One of the most critical problems in weight-sharing neural architecture search is the evaluation of candidate models within a predefined search space. In practice, a one-shot supernet is trained to serve as an evaluator. A faithful ranking certainly leads to more accurate searching results. However, current methods are prone to making misjudgments. In this paper, we prove that their biased evaluation is due to inherent unfairness in the supernet training. In view of this, we propose two levels of constraints: expectation fairness and strict fairness. Particularly, strict fairness ensures equal optimization opportunities for all choice blocks throughout the training, which neither overestimates nor underestimates their capacity. We demonstrate that this is crucial for improving the confidence of models' ranking. Incorporating the one-shot supernet trained under the proposed fairness constraints with a multi-objective evolutionary search algorithm, we obtain various state-of-the-art models, e.g., FairNAS-A attains 77.5% top-1 validation accuracy on ImageNet. The models and their evaluation codes are made publicly available online http://github.com/fairnas/FairNAS .

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.

Methods

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections