跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

论文库

检索计算机领域论文，按研究方向、作者或关键词筛选。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+2已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描：2026-11-15 01:33 · 全站最近入库：2026-11-14 15:09各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-14 02:15 — 2026-11-15 02:15（北京时间） · 点击数字查看对应简报；AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查：2026-11-15 01:33最近发现新增版本：2026-11-14 15:09库内论文最新更新时间：2026-11-13 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常；新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

23,348 已收录论文19,580 AI 相关6,729 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

研究日报 / 周报 →按信源浏览 →

时间范围跟随排序：版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常，查看状态 →

找到 3 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-15 01:32（北京时间）
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2604.21691

There Will Be a Scientific Theory of Deep Learning

Jamie Simon, Daniel Kunin, Alexander Atanasov, Enric Boix-Adserà, Blake Bordelon, Jeremy Cohen, Nikhil Ghosh, Florentin Guth 等 14 位作者

原文摘要

In this paper, we make the case that a scientific theory of deep learning is emerging. By this we mean a theory which characterizes important properties and statistics of the training process, hidden representations, final weights, and performance of neural networks. We pull together major strands of ongoing research in deep learning theory and identify five growing bodies of work that point toward such a theory: (a) solvable idealized settings that provide intuition for learning dynamics in realistic systems; (b) tractable limits that reveal insights into fundamental learning phenomena; (c) simple mathematical laws that capture important macroscopic observables; (d) theories of hyperparameters that disentangle them from the rest of the training process, leaving simpler systems behind; and (e) universal behaviors shared across systems and settings which clarify which phenomena call for explanation. Taken together, these bodies of work share certain broad traits: they are concerned with the dynamics of the training process; they primarily seek to describe coarse aggregate statistics; and they emphasize falsifiable quantitative predictions. We argue that the emerging theory is best thought of as a mechanics of the learning process, and suggest the name learning mechanics. We discuss the relationship between this mechanics perspective and other approaches for building a theory of deep learning, including the statistical and information-theoretic perspectives. In particular, we anticipate a symbiotic relationship between learning mechanics and mechanistic interpretability. We also review and address common arguments that fundamental theory will not be possible or is not important. We conclude with a portrait of important open directions in learning mechanics and advice for beginners. We host further introductory materials, perspectives, and open questions at learningmechanics.pub.

stat.ML · cs.LG

查看论文
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.13431

You Don't Need Feature Learning to Do In-Context Learning

Joseph Turnbull, Jamie Simon

原文摘要

How should we understand memorization vs. generalization in in-context learning (ICL) tasks, and when does one happen vs. the other? To investigate, we study how rotation-invariant kernel machines learn the ICL linear regression task proposed by Raventos et al. (2023). By decomposing the task in the kernel eigenbasis, we obtain a spectral picture of learning in this ICL setting. This picture reveals that as sample size grows, kernel machines learn successively-higher-degree components of the memorizing solution, which depend upon successively-higher-degree statistics of the training task set. The generalizing solution is approximately a low-degree truncation of the memorizing solution, and so the model first generalizes, then degrades into memorization as training proceeds. The takeaways are threefold. First, if this case is indicative, learning a "generalizing" solution on an ICL task is really just underfitting the memorizing solution! Second, the fact that kernel machines can generalize on this task means that feature learning is inessential to ICL. Third, transformers empirically trained to do ICL are shown to memorize tasks through the higher-order statistics of the training tasks that the kernel-based theory predicts, suggesting it applies even to models capable of feature learning.

cs.LG · cs.AI

查看论文
arXiv ↗PDF ↗
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2606.30509

Muon learns balanced solutions in matrix factorization without slow saddle-to-saddle dynamics

Mark Rhee, Jamie Simon, Dhruva Karkada

原文摘要

Matrix factorization (i.e., problems of the form $\min_{\mathbf{P},\mathbf{Q}} \|\mathbf{M}^\star - \mathbf{P}^\top\mathbf{Q}\|_\mathrm{F}^2$) is a minimal learning problem that exhibits both nonlinear parameter dynamics and representation learning. In this setting, we study how parameter trajectories under the Muon optimizer differ from those of gradient descent. We identify three main dynamical differences: (1) Muon avoids the slow saddle-to-saddle dynamics of GD from small initialization. Muon instead learns all the top singular vectors of $\mathbf{M}^\star$ at the same rate, and they saturate in order of increasing (rather than decreasing) singular value. (2) Muon does not diverge even when the learning rate exceeds the critical threshold set by the local loss sharpness. This frees the learning rate from the condition number of the problem, enabling rapid convergence via exponential learning rate annealing. (3) Once the weights are aligned with each other and the target, Muon flow conserves the matrix quantity $\sqrt{\mathbf{P}^\top \mathbf{P}}-\sqrt{\mathbf{Q}^\top \mathbf{Q}}$, while gradient flow is known to conserve the matrix $\mathbf{P}^\top\mathbf{P} - \mathbf{Q}^\top\mathbf{Q}$. Despite having distinct conserved quantities, both optimizers find the so-called balanced solution from vanishing initialization. When training from small random initialization, the weights spontaneously align early in training. We derive the alignment rates in simple settings and show that they predict the empirical alignment rates in general. Finally, we exploit structural properties of Muon to construct a learning rate schedule that achieves near-perfect alignment in only two optimization steps.

cs.LG

查看论文
arXiv ↗PDF ↗