Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This research demonstrates that increasing network width can effectively compensate for the lack of end-to-end backpropagation, allowing greedy layer-wise training to rival or even exceed standard methods in self-supervised learning. The study reveals that wider architectures trained with simpler optimization techniques develop more favorable representational geometry, challenging the assumption that global error coordination is strictly necessary for high-quality feature extraction. These findings offer practical insights for scaling models where full backpropagation may be computationally prohibitive.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Increasing Width Allows Greedy Layer-wise Training to Rival End-to-End Backpropagation in Self-Supervised Learning

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2610.00753v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: End-to-end backpropagation has been the dominant mode of training in deep learning, allowing for the coordination of parameter updates across layers of a neural network. Prior studies have explored alternative -- and, in some cases, simpler -- training mechanisms, showing that they can sometimes achieve performance similar to backpropagation. However, the architectural conditions under which locally optimized networks, which avoid end-to-end backpropagation of error, can learn representations comparable to those learned through end-to-end training remain unclear. We aim to answer this question in the context of self-supervised learning, an important framework for large-scale pretraining in artificial intelligence. Here, we investigate how network width and depth affect the efficacy of greedy layer-wise and end-to-end self-supervised training in convolutional networks. We find that in wider networks, the benefits of end-to-end backpropagation over greedy layer-wise training shrink: in relatively shallow and very wide networks, we even observed higher performance in models trained with greedy layer-wise training. Subsequent analysis of the representations formed by these networks shows that very wide greedy-trained networks exhibit more favorable representational geometry than do networks trained end-to-end with backpropagation. This work shows that width can compensate for restricted credit assignment and identifies differences in representational geometry as a potential mechanism for their improved performance.

Abstract:End-to-end backpropagation has been the dominant mode of training in deep learning, allowing for the coordination of parameter updates across layers of a neural network. Prior studies have explored alternative -- and, in some cases, simpler -- training mechanisms, showing that they can sometimes achieve performance similar to backpropagation. However, the architectural conditions under which locally optimized networks, which avoid end-to-end backpropagation of error, can learn representations comparable to those learned through end-to-end training remain unclear. We aim to answer this question in the context of self-supervised learning, an important framework for large-scale pretraining in artificial intelligence. Here, we investigate how network width and depth affect the efficacy of greedy layer-wise and end-to-end self-supervised training in convolutional networks. We find that in wider networks, the benefits of end-to-end backpropagation over greedy layer-wise training shrink: in relatively shallow and very wide networks, we even observed higher performance in models trained with greedy layer-wise training. Subsequent analysis of the representations formed by these networks shows that very wide greedy-trained networks exhibit more favorable representational geometry than do networks trained end-to-end with backpropagation. This work shows that width can compensate for restricted credit assignment and identifies differences in representational geometry as a potential mechanism for their improved performance.

Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Neural and Evolutionary Computing (cs.NE); Neurons and Cognition (q-bio.NC)

arXiv:2610.00753 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2610.00753v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.00753 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 241 words

Related coverage