MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387343669 · doi:10.1002/cpa.22169

High‐dimensional limit theorems for SGD: Effective dynamics and critical scaling

2023· article· en· W4387343669 on OpenAlexafffund
Gérard Ben Arous, Reza Gheissari, Aukosh Jagannath

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications on Pure and Applied Mathematics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRandom Matrices and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsAdolph C. and Mary Sprague Miller Institute for Basic Research in Science, University of California BerkeleyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsScalingLimit (mathematics)Bounded functionStatistical physicsGaussianConvergence (economics)Scaling limitApplied mathematicsMathematical analysisPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study the scaling limits of stochastic gradient descent (SGD) with constant step‐size in the high‐dimensional regime. We prove limit theorems for the trajectories of summary statistics (i.e., finite‐dimensional functions) of SGD as the dimension goes to infinity. Our approach allows one to choose the summary statistics that are tracked, the initialization, and the step‐size. It yields both ballistic (ODE) and diffusive (SDE) limits, with the limit depending dramatically on the former choices. We show a critical scaling regime for the step‐size, below which the effective ballistic dynamics matches gradient flow for the population loss, but at which, a new correction term appears which changes the phase diagram. About the fixed points of this effective dynamics, the corresponding diffusive limits can be quite complex and even degenerate. We demonstrate our approach on popular examples including estimation for spiked matrix and tensor models and classification via two‐layer networks for binary and XOR‐type Gaussian mixture models. These examples exhibit surprising phenomena including multimodal timescales to convergence as well as convergence to sub‐optimal solutions with probability bounded away from zero from random (e.g., Gaussian) initializations. At the same time, we demonstrate the benefit of overparametrization by showing that the latter probability goes to zero as the second layer width grows.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications on Pure and Applied MathematicsSame topicRandom Matrices and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207