We need to talk about random seeds
Steven Bethard

TL;DR
This paper discusses the proper and improper uses of random seeds in neural network training, highlighting risks and best practices to improve research reliability.
Contribution
It clarifies safe versus risky uses of random seeds in neural network experiments and provides an analysis of recent literature's practices.
Findings
Over 50% of recent publications have risky seed practices
Safe uses include hyperparameter search, ensembles, and sensitivity analysis
Risks involve fixed seeds for replicability and performance comparison
Abstract
Modern neural network libraries all take as a hyperparameter a random seed, typically used to determine the initial state of the model parameters. This opinion piece argues that there are some safe uses for random seeds: as part of the hyperparameter search to select a good model, creating an ensemble of several models, or measuring the sensitivity of the training algorithm to the random seed hyperparameter. It argues that some uses for random seeds are risky: using a fixed random seed for "replicability" and varying only the random seed to create score distributions for performance comparison. An analysis of 85 recent publications from the ACL Anthology finds that more than 50% contain risky uses of random seeds.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMachine Learning and Data Classification · Neural Networks and Applications
