Bayesian RG flow in neural network field theories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Neural Network Field Theory correspondence (NNFT) is a mapping from neural network (NN) architectures into the space of statistical field theories (SFTs). The Bayesian renormalization group (BRG) is an information-theoretic coarse graining scheme that generalizes the principles of the exact renormalization group (ERG) to arbitrarily parameterized probability distributions, including those of NNs. In BRG, coarse graining is performed in parameter space with respect to an information-theoretic distinguishability scale set by the Fisher information metric. In this paper, we unify NNFT and BRG to form a powerful new framework for exploring the space of NNs and SFTs, which we coin BRG-NNFT. With BRG-NNFT, NN training dynamics can be interpreted as inducing a flow in the space of SFTs from the information-theoretic ‘IR’ → → ‘UV’. Conversely, applying an information-shell coarse graining to the trained network’s parameters induces a flow in the space of SFTs from the information-theoretic ‘UV’ → → ‘IR’. When the information-theoretic cutoff scale coincides with a standard momentum scale, BRG is equivalent to ERG. We demonstrate the BRG-NNFT correspondence on two analytically tractable examples. First, we construct BRG flows for trained, infinite-width NNs, of arbitrary depth, with generic activation functions. As a special case, we then restrict to architectures with a single infinitely-wide layer, scalar outputs, and generalized cos-net activations. In this case, we show that BRG coarse-graining corresponds exactly to the momentum-shell ERG flow of a free scalar SFT. Our analytic results are corroborated by a numerical experiment in which an ensemble of asymptotically wide NNs are trained and subsequently renormalized using an information-shell BRG scheme.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".