<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>The Complexity Dynamics of Grokking · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2412.09810/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2412.09810/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>The Complexity Dynamics of Grokking — mentioned by _hark</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47331048</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2412.09810:47331048</guid><pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2026 02:06:11 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;You literally can do a kind of model PCA, using the Hessian (matrix of second derivatives of the loss function w/r/t the parameters, aka the local curvature of the loss landscape), and diagonalizing. These eigenvectors and eigenvalues (the spectrum of the Hessian) tend to be power-law distributed in just about every deep NN you can think of [1]. That is, there are a few &amp;quot;really important&amp;quot; (highly curved) dimensions in parameter space (the top eigenvectors) which control the model&amp;#x27;s performance (the loss function). Conversely, there are very many &amp;quot;unimportant&amp;quot;/low curvature dimensions in the…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2412.09810/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LG</category></item></channel></rss>
