The Sparsity Whisperer
Summary
This paper introduces difference-informed pruning methods (Wisp, Wisp+, Whisper) for large language models, showing that preserving output differences improves sparsification across Llama 2 and 3.1 models up to 405B parameters.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 08/10/26, 08:02 AM
# The Sparsity Whisperer Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.06630](https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.06630) [View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2608.06630) > Abstract:Pruning reduces the inference cost of large language models, but existing criteria primarily preserve large activations or reconstruct layer outputs\. We argue that this overlooks a key computation performed by particularly sparsity\-sensitive neurons in the MLP up and gate projections: separating similar inputs into dissimilar outputs\. This suggests that effective pruning should preserve not only activations, but also the differences between outputs more broadly\. We introduce a family of difference\-informed pruning methods built upon this principle\. Wisp is a first\-order, update\-free method that scores weights using input\-difference norms, and Wisp\+ refines this score neuronwise using the input pairs each neuron separates most strongly\. Finally, Whisper is a second\-order method that uses a lightly regularized difference Hessian as its reconstruction objective\. Across Llama 2 and 3\.1 models from 7B to 405B parameters, our second\-order variant consistently improves over strong reconstruction\-based baselines, while our update\-free variants improve over activation\-aware baselines, especially in constrained settings\. The improvements over Wanda and SparseGPT extend to structured sparsity, downstream evaluations, and other model families\. Augmenting stronger techniques such as RIA and ALPS with our difference\-informed criteria yields further improvements, shifting the overall accuracy\-runtime frontier outward at negligible additional cost\. These results suggest that preserving output differences is a broadly useful and composable signal for post\-training LLM sparsification\. ## Submission history From: Linghao Kong \[[view email](https://arxiv.org/show-email/65a34912/2608.06630)\] **\[v1\]**Thu, 6 Aug 2026 22:37:26 UTC \(2,853 KB\)
Similar Articles
Weight Pruning Amplifies Bias: A Multi-Method Study of Compressed LLMs for Edge AI
This study reveals a 'Smart Pruning Paradox' where activation-aware pruning methods like Wanda preserve perplexity but significantly amplify bias in Large Language Models deployed on edge devices.
Beyond Single-Dimensional Compression: The Compound Sparsity Frontier of Large Language Models
This paper introduces a compound sparsity framework for LLMs that combines static parameter pruning with dynamic token-level computation, showing that mixing both mechanisms outperforms single-dimension compression and delays performance degradation.
Structured Pruning of Large Language Models via Power Transformation and Sign-Preserving Score Aggregation with Adaptive Feature Retention
This paper proposes a structured pruning method for LLMs that addresses distribution mismatch, sign-information loss, and outlier influence when adapting unstructured pruning techniques, achieving comparable accuracy with 1.56-1.57x speedup on models like Llama-3-8B and Vicuna-v1.5-13B.
TriSP: Tri-Signal Structured Pruning for Large Language Models
TriSP introduces a tri-signal importance metric combining weight magnitude, activation norm, and gradient sensitivity for structured pruning of LLMs, achieving lowest perplexity and high throughput improvements on LLaMA-7B.
Small LLMs: Pruning vs. Training from Scratch
This paper empirically compares pruning vs. training small language models from scratch, finding that pruning provides a strong advantage under limited token budgets but that the advantage diminishes as training scales, especially with coarse pruning.