MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416275249 · doi:10.1088/1742-5468/ae1214

A theory of initialisation’s impact on specialisation <sup>*</sup>

2025· article· W4416275249 on OpenAlexafffund
Devon Jarvis, Sebastian Lee, Clémentine Carla Juliette Dominé, Andrew Saxe, Stefano Sarao Mannelli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Statistical Mechanics Theory and Experiment · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersNational Research FoundationWellcome TrustCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsForgettingPremiseArtificial neural networkEntropy (arrow of time)Monotonic functionConsolidation (business)Context (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Prior work has demonstrated a consistent tendency in neural networks engaged in continual learning tasks, wherein intermediate task similarity results in the highest levels of catastrophic interference. This phenomenon is attributed to the network’s tendency to reuse learned features across tasks. However, this explanation heavily relies on the premise that neuron specialisation occurs, i.e. the emergence of localised representations. Our investigation challenges the validity of this assumption. Using theoretical frameworks for the analysis of neural networks, we show a strong dependence of specialisation on the initial condition. More precisely, we show that weight imbalance and high weight entropy can favour specialised solutions. We then apply these insights in the context of continual learning, first showing the emergence of a monotonic relation between task-similarity and forgetting in non-specialised networks. Finally, we show that specialisation by weight imbalance is beneficial on the commonly employed elastic weight consolidation regularisation technique.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Statistical Mechanics Theory and ExperimentSame topicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningFrench-language works237,207