MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996067004

Generalization of Two-layer Neural Networks: An Asymptotic Viewpoint

2020· article· en· W2996067004 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Learning Representations · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicStochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInitializationGeneralizationGradient descentLayer (electronics)Artificial neural networkPopulationMathematicsComputer scienceFlow (mathematics)Applied mathematicsMathematical analysisArtificial intelligenceGeometryChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the generalization properties of two-layer neural networks in high-dimensions, i.e. when the number of samples $n$, features $d$, and neurons $h$ tend to infinity at the same rate. Specifically, we derive the exact population risk of the unregularized least squares regression problem with two-layer neural networks when either the first or the second layer is trained using a gradient flow under different initialization setups. When only the second layer coefficients are optimized, we recover the double descent phenomenon: a cusp in the population risk appears at $h\approx n$ and further overparameterization decreases the risk. In contrast, when the first layer weights are optimized, we highlight how different scales of initialization lead to different inductive bias, and show that the resulting risk is \textit{independent} of overparameterization. Our theoretical and experimental results suggest that previously studied model setups that provably give rise to double descent might not translate to two-layer neural networks.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it