Efficient training for compact compression models via sequential distillation

Caroline Mazini Rodrigues (COMPACT); Nicolas Keriven (COMPACT); Thomas Maugey (COMPACT)

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 35 references

Efficient training for compact compression models via sequential distillation

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-05-21 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Sequential distillation lets lightweight autoencoders reach good image reconstructions earlier in training.

desk verdict Sequential distillation gives compact compression autoencoders a stronger early start, but the baseline may not match total training steps. read the letter →

arxiv 2601.05639 v2 pith:6TSXWNCG submitted 2026-01-09 cs.CV cs.LG

Caroline Mazini Rodrigues (COMPACT) , Nicolas Keriven (COMPACT) , Thomas Maugey (COMPACT) This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.CVcs.LG

keywords imagecompressionknowledgedistillationautoencoderslightweightmodelssequentialtrainingmodelcompactnetworks

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proposes training reduced autoencoders for image compression through a staged knowledge distillation process. It first runs a sequential encoder-decoder distillation to initialize the compact model with simpler objectives before moving to standard training that can add latent distillation. Experiments on two architectures show this sequence maintains reconstruction quality and statistical fidelity better in the first epochs than direct training with the original loss. The approach targets hardware-constrained settings where full-scale training is impractical. If correct, it lowers the barrier to deploying efficient compression models.

What carries the argument

Sequential encoder-decoder distillation stage that initializes the lightweight model before full training.

What would settle it

Train identical lightweight autoencoders on the same image compression data with and without the sequential distillation initialization and measure whether reconstruction quality and statistical fidelity still differ in the first ten epochs.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

A sequential encoder-decoder distillation stage followed by standard training (optionally with latent distillation) supplies a robust initialization that lets lightweight autoencoders preserve reconstruction quality and statistical fidelity in early epochs on image compression tasks, outperforming direct optimization with the original loss.

Load-bearing premise

Highly reduced architectures benefit from simplified optimization objectives in early training, with complexity gradually introduced later.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The compact models reach usable compression performance after fewer training steps.
Statistical match to the original data distribution improves faster than with direct loss training.
Resource-limited environments can produce effective autoencoders with lower total compute.
The staged process applies across at least two different lightweight architectures.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Similar staged initialization could shorten training for compact models in video or audio compression.
Edge-device deployment timelines shorten because convergence happens before full hardware resources are spent.
Varying the number or order of distillation stages offers a direct experimental knob for final rate-distortion trade-offs.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper's main contribution is a two-stage training recipe for lightweight image compression autoencoders: first a sequential encoder-then-decoder distillation pass to set a decent initialization, followed by standard training that can add latent distillation. This is presented as a way to make reduced architectures converge more stably when compute is tight. The experiments on two different compact models reportedly keep reconstruction quality and statistical properties better in the first epochs than plain training with the original loss. That practical focus on early-epoch behavior is the useful part for hardware-constrained settings. The idea is a direct extension of existing distillation work rather than a new framework, but applying the curriculum specifically to compression autoencoders is a reasonable targeted step. The soft spot is the comparison setup. If the baseline only runs the final-stage epochs while the proposed method gets the full distillation plus final epochs, any early advantage could simply reflect extra optimization steps instead of the sequential curriculum. The abstract gives no numbers, error bars, or explicit statement that total compute is equalized, so the full paper needs to show that clearly with ablations. This is aimed at people building or deploying small compression models who care about training stability under limits. A reader working on efficient autoencoders would get some actionable ideas if the compute controls hold. It is worth sending to peer review because the problem is real and the method is straightforward to verify, even if the experiments need tightening on fairness.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a sequential encoder-decoder distillation stage to initialize lightweight autoencoders for image compression, followed by standard training optionally regularized by latent distillation. The central claim is that this staged procedure preserves reconstruction quality and statistical fidelity better in early epochs than direct training of the compact models with the original loss, evaluated on two architectures.

Significance. If the early-epoch advantages are confirmed under matched compute, the method could provide a practical curriculum for stable training of resource-constrained compression networks, extending knowledge distillation ideas to reduced architectures in hardware-limited settings.

major comments (2)

Abstract: the claim of better early-epoch performance provides no quantitative metrics, error bars, dataset details, or ablation studies, leaving the central empirical claim with limited verifiable support.
Experiments section: the baseline of training lightweight autoencoders with the original loss does not specify whether it receives the same total optimization steps as the proposed distillation-plus-final-training procedure; unequal budgets could account for the reported early-epoch advantage rather than the sequential curriculum.

minor comments (2)

The intuition about simplified objectives in early training could be stated more formally, perhaps with a brief description of the loss schedules in each stage.
Clarify the exact architectures used for the two evaluated models and the teacher network to aid reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will make to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: Abstract: the claim of better early-epoch performance provides no quantitative metrics, error bars, dataset details, or ablation studies, leaving the central empirical claim with limited verifiable support.

Authors: We agree the abstract is too high-level. The full manuscript reports PSNR and MS-SSIM on Kodak and CLIC at multiple early epochs, with standard deviations across three runs and ablations on encoder versus decoder distillation. We will revise the abstract to include one or two key quantitative results (e.g., average PSNR gain at epoch 10) and the primary dataset names. revision: yes
Referee: Experiments section: the baseline of training lightweight autoencoders with the original loss does not specify whether it receives the same total optimization steps as the proposed distillation-plus-final-training procedure; unequal budgets could account for the reported early-epoch advantage rather than the sequential curriculum.

Authors: We confirm that the baseline receives exactly the same total number of gradient steps as the sum of the distillation stage plus the subsequent standard-training stage in the proposed method. The distillation phase is an initialization step whose cost is offset by shortening the final training phase so that overall compute is matched. We will add an explicit paragraph and table row stating the step counts for each phase and confirming equal total optimization budgets. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: empirical training procedure with no derivation chain

full rationale

The paper describes an empirical methodology for training lightweight autoencoders via sequential encoder-decoder distillation followed by standard training (optionally with latent distillation). No equations, first-principles derivations, or mathematical predictions are presented that could reduce to fitted inputs or self-referential definitions. Claims rest on experimental observations of reconstruction quality and statistical fidelity in early epochs, compared against training with the original loss. There are no self-citations, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes invoked as load-bearing elements. The approach is self-contained as a practical curriculum for resource-limited settings, with no reduction of results to the inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that staged simplification of objectives aids lightweight model training; no free parameters or invented entities are explicitly introduced in the abstract.

assumptions (1)

domain assumption Highly reduced architectures benefit from simplified optimization objectives in early training, with complexity gradually introduced later.
This intuition is directly stated as the basis for the sequential distillation stage.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Efficient training for compact compression models via sequential distillation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6TSXWNCG

@misc{pith2026260105639,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Efficient training for compact compression models via sequential distillation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6TSXWNCG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2601.05639}
}

read the original abstract

Deep learning models for image compression often face practical limitations in hardware-constrained applications. Although these models achieve high-quality reconstructions, they are typically complex, heavyweight, and require substantial training data and computational resources. We propose a methodology to significantly reduce autoencoder-based compression networks in a more stable Knowledge Distillation process. The intuition is that highly reduced architectures benefit from simplified optimization objectives in early training, with complexity gradually introduced later. Therefore, our approach begins with a sequential encoder--decoder distillation stage that provides a robust initialization for the lightweight model. This is followed by standard training that can be regularized with latent distillation. We evaluate the resulting lightweight autoencoders across two different architectures on the image compression task. Experiments show that our method preserves reconstruction quality and statistical fidelity in early epochs better than training lightweight autoencoders with the original loss, making it practical for resource-limited environments.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

We employ Feature-Based Knowledge Distillation to use the knowledge of T called the teacher to train the reduced encoder S, the student... LKD(yT, yS) = ||yT - yS||_2^2
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AlphaCoordinateFixation.lean J_uniquely_calibrated_via_higher_derivative unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

Experiments show that our method preserves reconstruction quality and statistical fidelity in early epochs better than training lightweight autoencoders with the original loss.

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

[1]

Efficient training for compact compression models via sequential distillation

INTRODUCTION Deep learning models have increasingly been adopted in im- age compression applications where handcrafted codecs [1, 2, 3] were once more common [4]. This shift is due not only to their ability to approximate complex functions, but also to their capacity to efficiently learn from and adapt to large-scale data. Compared to traditional codecs, ...

work page Pith review arXiv
[2]

To support deployment on hardware-constrained devices, we adopt a reduction strategy with lower computa- tional cost in training time and dataset size

ENCODER REDUCTION We aim toreduce encoder size while keeping the decoder un- changed, maintaining performance comparable to the origi- nal model. To support deployment on hardware-constrained devices, we adopt a reduction strategy with lower computa- tional cost in training time and dataset size. As shown previ- ously in Figure 1, simply reducing the enco...

work page
[3]

For both architectures, gS s (·) = gT s (·) and EB S (·) = EB T (·), and in the Hyperprior case also hS s (·) = hT s (·)

Encoder width reduction: We aim to reduce the en- coder size while keeping the decoder unchanged. For both architectures, gS s (·) = gT s (·) and EB S (·) = EB T (·), and in the Hyperprior case also hS s (·) = hT s (·). These modules re- main frozen, while only the reduced encoder parts, ga(·) and ha(·), are trained. Figure 2 shows the Factorized Prior ex...

work page
[4]

Under hardware con- straints, storage and training time are challenges

Dataset reduction: Another limitation of these models is their dependence on large datasets. Under hardware con- straints, storage and training time are challenges. We address this by training on only a fraction of the data, denoted by ρ

work page
[5]

This approach decreases training time, addressing a constraint in resource-limited environments

Complexity loss reduction: We aim to train the new lightweight encoder on a reduced dataset using a simplified, easy-to-optimize loss. This approach decreases training time, addressing a constraint in resource-limited environments. Reduction methodology: We employ Feature-Based Knowledge Distillation [18] to use the knowledge ofT called the teacher to tra...

work page
[6]

(3) For the Hyperprior architecture, both the latent represen- tation yT and the hyper-latent zT are approximated, resulting in the loss function defined in Equation (4): LKD (yT , zT , yS , zS ) = ∥yT − yS ∥2 2 + ∥zT − zS ∥2

work page
[7]

EXPERIMENTS AND RESULTS For clarity, we denote by M a set of models m that share the same characteristics but differ in their image compression rates (i.e., target bit-per-pixel values). Formally, ∀m ∈ M ρ r, m is trained with encoder reduction rate r (higher r results in smaller decoder) and uses ρ percent of the specified train- ing dataset (smaller ρ r...

work page arXiv 1924
[8]

CONCLUSION In this paper, we propose a methodology that employs a sim- plified knowledge distillation strategy to approximate latent representations from complex encoders in image compres- sion networks to small encoders. We showed that, under con- straints such as model size, training data, and training time, our models outperform direct encoder reductio...

work page

Show all 35 references

[9]

The jpeg still picture compression standard,

G.K. Wallace, “The jpeg still picture compression standard,” IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics , vol. 38, no. 1, pp. xviii–xxxiv, 1992

1992
[10]

Intra coding of the hevc standard,

Jani Lainema, Frank Bossen, Woo-Jin Han, Junghye Min, and Kemal Ugur, “Intra coding of the hevc standard,”IEEE Trans- actions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 1792–1801, 2012

2012
[11]

Intra prediction and mode cod- ing in vvc,

Jonathan Pfaff, Alexey Filippov, Shan Liu, Xin Zhao, Jianle Chen, Santiago De-Lux ´an-Hern´andez, Thomas Wie- gand, Vasily Rufitskiy, Adarsh Krishnan Ramasubramonian, and Geert Van der Auwera, “Intra prediction and mode cod- ing in vvc,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Syste...

2021
[12]

An introduc- tion to neural data compression,

Yibo Yang, Stephan Mandt, and Lucas Theis, “An introduc- tion to neural data compression,” Foundations and Trends in Computer Graphics and Vision, vol. 5, pp. 113–200, 2023

2023
[13]

End- to-end optimization of nonlinear transform codes for percep- tual quality,

Johannes Ball ´e, Valero Laparra, and Eero P. Simoncell, “End- to-end optimization of nonlinear transform codes for percep- tual quality,” in 32th Picture Coding Symposium (PCS), 2016

2016
[14]

End- to-end optimized image compression,

Johannes Ball ´e, Valero Laparra, and Eero P. Simoncelli, “End- to-end optimized image compression,” in 5th International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2017, pp. 1– 27

2017
[15]

Variational image compression with a scale hyperprior,

Johannes Ball ´e, David Minnen, Saurabh Singh, Sung Jin Hwang, and Nick Johnston, “Variational image compression with a scale hyperprior,” in 6th International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2018, pp. 1–23

2018
[16]

Computationally-efficient neural image compression with shallow decoders,

Yibo Yang and Stephan Mandt, “Computationally-efficient neural image compression with shallow decoders,” in 19th In- ternational Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2023, pp. 1–23

2023
[17]

Mcucoder: Adaptive bitrate learned video compression for iot devices,

Ali Hojjat, Janek Haberer, and Olaf Landsiedel, “Mcucoder: Adaptive bitrate learned video compression for iot devices,” ArXiv, vol. abs/2411.19442, 2024

2024
[18]

Asymmetric autoencoders: An nn alternative for resource- constrained devices in iot networks,

Mateus Gilbert, Marcello Campos, and Miguel Campista, “Asymmetric autoencoders: An nn alternative for resource- constrained devices in iot networks,” Ad Hoc Networks , vol. 156, pp. 103412, 02 2024

2024
[19]

Block modulating video compression: An ultra low complex- ity image compression encoder for resource limited platforms,

Siming Zheng, Yujia Xue, Waleed Tahir, Zhengjue Wang, Hao Zhang, Ziyi Meng, Gang Qu, Siwei Ma, and Xin Yuan, “Block modulating video compression: An ultra low complex- ity image compression encoder for resource limited platforms,” 2024

2024
[20]

Toward edge-based deep learning in industrial in- ternet of things,

Fan Liang, Wei Yu, Xing Liu, David Griffith, and Nada Golmie, “Toward edge-based deep learning in industrial in- ternet of things,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal , vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 4329–4341, 2020

2020
[21]

The lottery ticket hy- pothesis: Finding sparse, trainable neural networks,

Jonathan Frankle and Michael Carbin, “The lottery ticket hy- pothesis: Finding sparse, trainable neural networks,” in 7th In- ternational Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) , 2019

2019
[22]

An improved upper bound on the rate-distortion function of images,

Zhihao Duan, Jack Ma, Jiangpeng He, and Fengqing Zhu, “An improved upper bound on the rate-distortion function of images,” in International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), 2023

2023
[23]

Dis- tilling the knowledge in a neural network,

Geoffrey E. Hinton, Oriol Vinyals, and Jeffrey Dean, “Dis- tilling the knowledge in a neural network,” ArXiv, vol. abs/1503.02531, 2015

2015 arXiv
[24]

Sar im- age compression with inherent denoising capability through knowledge distillation,

Ziyuan Liu, Shaoping Wang, and Yuantao Gu, “Sar im- age compression with inherent denoising capability through knowledge distillation,” IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sens- ing Letters, vol. PP, pp. 1–5, 2024

2024
[25]

Learning-driven lossy image compression: A compre- hensive survey,

Sadia Jamil, Md Jalil Piran, MuhibUr Rahman, and Oh-Jin Kwo, “Learning-driven lossy image compression: A compre- hensive survey,” Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelli- gence, vol. 123, pp. 1–17, 2023

2023
[26]

Fitnets: Hints for thin deep nets,

Adriana Romero, Nicolas Ballas, Samira Ebrahimi Kahou, An- toine Chassang, Carlo Gatta, and Yoshua Bengio, “Fitnets: Hints for thin deep nets,” 2015

2015
[27]

Improving statistical fi- delity for neural image compression with implicit local like- lihood models,

Matthew J. Muckley, Alaaeldin El-Nouby, Karen Ullrich, Herve Jegou, and Jakob Verbeek, “Improving statistical fi- delity for neural image compression with implicit local like- lihood models,” in 40th International Conference on Machine Learning, 2023, vol. 202 of Proceedings o...

2023
[28]

High-fidelity generative image compres- sion,

Fabian Mentzer, George Toderici, Michael Tschannen, and Eirikur Agustsson, “High-fidelity generative image compres- sion,” in 34th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2020

2020
[29]

Compressai: a pytorch library and evaluation platform for end-to-end compression research,

Jean B ´egaint, Fabien Racap ´e, Simon Feltman, and Akshay Pushparaja, “Compressai: a pytorch library and evaluation platform for end-to-end compression research,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.03029, 2020

2011
[30]

Neuralcompres- sion,

Matthew Muckley, Jordan Juravsky, Daniel Severo, Mannat Singh, Quentin Duval, and Karen Ullrich, “Neuralcompres- sion,” https://github.com/facebookresearch/ NeuralCompression, 2021

2021
[31]

vimeo 90k 7,

Wang Sally, “vimeo 90k 7,” https://www.kaggle. com/datasets/wangsally/vimeo-90k-7, 2022 (ac- cessed September 8, 2025)

2022
[32]

Kodak lossless true color image suite,

Rich Franzen, “Kodak lossless true color image suite,” https://r0k.us/graphics/kodak/, 1999 (accessed September 8, 2025)

1999
[33]

Clic 2020: Challenge on learned image compression,

G. Toderici, L. Theis, N. Johnston, E. Agustsson, F. Mentzer, J. Ball ´e, W. Shi, and R. Timofte, “Clic 2020: Challenge on learned image compression,” 2020

2020
[34]

Video enhancement with task-oriented flow,

Tianfan Xue, Baian Chen, Jiajun Wu, Donglai Wei, and William T. Freeman, “Video enhancement with task-oriented flow,” International Journal of Computer Vision (IJCV) , vol. 127, no. 8, pp. 1106–1125, 2019

2019
[35]

The open images dataset v4,

Alina Kuznetsova, Hassan Rom, Neil Alldrin, Jasper Uijlings, Ivan Krasin, Jordi Pont-Tuset, Shahab Kamali, Stefan Popov, Matteo Malloci, Alexander Kolesnikov, Tom Duerig, and Vit- torio Ferrari, “The open images dataset v4,” International Journal of Computer Vision, vol. 128, ...

1956

Pith tools

Reviewed May 21, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Efficient training for compact compression models via sequential distillation

INTRODUCTION Deep learning models have increasingly been adopted in im- age compression applications where handcrafted codecs [1, 2, 3] were once more common [4]. This shift is due not only to their ability to approximate complex functions, but also to their capacity to efficiently learn from and adapt to large-scale data. Compared to traditional codecs, ...

work page Pith review arXiv

[2] [2]

To support deployment on hardware-constrained devices, we adopt a reduction strategy with lower computa- tional cost in training time and dataset size

ENCODER REDUCTION We aim toreduce encoder size while keeping the decoder un- changed, maintaining performance comparable to the origi- nal model. To support deployment on hardware-constrained devices, we adopt a reduction strategy with lower computa- tional cost in training time and dataset size. As shown previ- ously in Figure 1, simply reducing the enco...

work page

[3] [3]

For both architectures, gS s (·) = gT s (·) and EB S (·) = EB T (·), and in the Hyperprior case also hS s (·) = hT s (·)

Encoder width reduction: We aim to reduce the en- coder size while keeping the decoder unchanged. For both architectures, gS s (·) = gT s (·) and EB S (·) = EB T (·), and in the Hyperprior case also hS s (·) = hT s (·). These modules re- main frozen, while only the reduced encoder parts, ga(·) and ha(·), are trained. Figure 2 shows the Factorized Prior ex...

work page

[4] [4]

Under hardware con- straints, storage and training time are challenges

Dataset reduction: Another limitation of these models is their dependence on large datasets. Under hardware con- straints, storage and training time are challenges. We address this by training on only a fraction of the data, denoted by ρ

work page

[5] [5]

This approach decreases training time, addressing a constraint in resource-limited environments

Complexity loss reduction: We aim to train the new lightweight encoder on a reduced dataset using a simplified, easy-to-optimize loss. This approach decreases training time, addressing a constraint in resource-limited environments. Reduction methodology: We employ Feature-Based Knowledge Distillation [18] to use the knowledge ofT called the teacher to tra...

work page

[6] [6]

(3) For the Hyperprior architecture, both the latent represen- tation yT and the hyper-latent zT are approximated, resulting in the loss function defined in Equation (4): LKD (yT , zT , yS , zS ) = ∥yT − yS ∥2 2 + ∥zT − zS ∥2

work page

[7] [7]

EXPERIMENTS AND RESULTS For clarity, we denote by M a set of models m that share the same characteristics but differ in their image compression rates (i.e., target bit-per-pixel values). Formally, ∀m ∈ M ρ r, m is trained with encoder reduction rate r (higher r results in smaller decoder) and uses ρ percent of the specified train- ing dataset (smaller ρ r...

work page arXiv 1924

[8] [8]

CONCLUSION In this paper, we propose a methodology that employs a sim- plified knowledge distillation strategy to approximate latent representations from complex encoders in image compres- sion networks to small encoders. We showed that, under con- straints such as model size, training data, and training time, our models outperform direct encoder reductio...

work page