On Lyapunov Exponents for RNNs: Understanding Information Propagation Using Dynamical Systems Tools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recurrent neural networks (RNNs) have been successfully applied to a variety of problems involving sequential data, but their optimization is sensitive to parameter initialization, architecture, and optimizer hyperparameters. Considering RNNs as dynamical systems, a natural way to capture stability, i.e., the growth and decay over long iterates, are the Lyapunov Exponents (LEs), which form the Lyapunov spectrum. The LEs have a bearing on stability of RNN training dynamics since forward propagation of information is related to the backward propagation of error gradients. LEs measure the asymptotic rates of expansion and contraction of non-linear system trajectories, and generalize stability analysis to the time-varying attractors structuring the non-autonomous dynamics of data-driven RNNs. As a tool to understand and exploit stability of training dynamics, the Lyapunov spectrum fills an existing gap between prescriptive mathematical approaches of limited scope and computationally-expensive empirical approaches. To leverage this tool, we implement an efficient way to compute LEs for RNNs during training, discuss the aspects specific to standard RNN architectures driven by typical sequential datasets, and show that the Lyapunov spectrum can serve as a robust readout of training stability across hyperparameters. With this exposition-oriented contribution, we hope to draw attention to this under-studied, but theoretically grounded tool for understanding training stability in RNNs.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".