arXiv:2505.20628v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Deep learning models are increasingly subject to explicit requirements, or constraints, such as safety levels, fairness limits, and sparsity budgets. In practice, such requirements are often handled through fixed weighted-sum penalization: the constraints are added to the task loss with fixed coefficients, and the resulting scalarized objective is minimized. This position paper argues that fixed penalization is often ill-suited to deep learning problems with non-negotiable requirements, for three main reasons. First, in non-convex settings, the penalized and constrained problems are not, in general, equivalent, so a minimizer of the penalized objective need not solve the constrained problem. Second, a penalty coefficient sets an objective-constraint trade-off rather than the constraint level, so finding an acceptable coefficient often takes trial and error, each trial a full training run. Third, fixed penalization weakens hard requirements into soft penalties to be traded off against task performance. As a result, compliance is no longer built into the problem, and requirements can be quietly relaxed. We therefore argue that, when a deep learning problem specifies non-negotiable requirements, one should solve the constrained problem itself instead of a surrogate defined by fixed penalization.