HackerPapers

arXiv:2210.01117cs.LG

Omnigrok: Grokking Beyond Algorithmic Data

Ziming Liu, Eric J. Michaud, Max Tegmark

Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.

Abstract

Grokking, the unusual phenomenon for algorithmic datasets where generalization happens long after overfitting the training data, has remained elusive. We aim to understand grokking by analyzing the loss landscapes of neural networks, identifying the mismatch between training and test losses as the cause for grokking. We refer to this as the "LU mechanism" because training and test losses (against model weight norm) typically resemble "L" and "U", respectively. This simple mechanism can nicely explain many aspects of grokking: data size dependence, weight decay dependence, the emergence of representations, etc. Guided by the intuitive picture, we are able to induce grokking on tasks involving images, language and molecules. In the reverse direction, we are able to eliminate grokking for algorithmic datasets. We attribute the dramatic nature of grokking for algorithmic datasets to representation learning.

arXiv comments
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.LGMachine Learning cs.AIArtificial Intelligence physics.data-anData Analysis, Statistics and Probability stat.MEMethodology (Statistics) stat.MLMachine Learning (Statistics)

On Hacker News

Linked by 1 identifiable commenter in 1 comment across 1 thread, from Jan 2023 to Jan 2023.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments1 thread

    • > Why do people say they don't now how it works "Curve Fitting" is the objective, the function encoded in the weights is the solution, and not actually well understood. See work from Anthropic[1] and Google[2] that explores this. As an analogy consider applying the same argument…

      cmorezView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.