aiqbench analysis
This study identifies the frequency of discrete class-separability jumps during ResNet fine-tuning as a robust predictor of final test accuracy on standard benchmarks, outperforming several alternative training-curve signals. However, the predictive correlation weakens significantly under distributional stress or data corruption, suggesting this metric is best suited for in-distribution quality assessment rather than generalization guarantees. The findings offer an inexpensive logging procedure to monitor training dynamics without requiring complex computational probes like Hessian sharpness or Fisher information.
Phase Transition Frequency as a Training Time Predictor of Test Accuracy in ResNets
arXiv:2609.05194v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The number of discrete class-separability jumps observed during ResNet finetuning is examined empirically as a predictor of final test accuracy. Across 75 experiments spanning four benchmarks (CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, TinyImageNet, and CIFAR-10-C) and three architectures (ResNet-18, ResNet-50, and ResNet-101), with five to ten seeds per configuration, a strong within-dataset negative correlation is obtained on standard i.i.d. classification benchmarks: \(r = -0.84\) on CIFAR-10 (\(p < 10^{-8}\), \(n = 30\)) and \(r = -0.87\) on CIFAR-100 (\(p < 10^{-5}\), \(n = 15\)). Under distributional stress, the relationship attenuates: TinyImageNet yields \(r = -0.45\), and the CIFAR-10-C corruption benchmark yields \(r = -0.19\). Two additional analyses discipline the empirical claim. A partial correlation controlling for architecture depth, treated as a linear covariate, shows that on CIFAR-100 the transition count retains statistically significant predictive power (\(r_{\mathrm{partial}} = -0.69\), \(p = 0.007\)); the corresponding result under the stricter categorical conditioning is not established at \(n = 15\). A comparison against six alternative training-curve signals shows that transition count achieved the strongest correlation among the evaluated signals on CIFAR-100 and one of the strongest on CIFAR-10, but is dominated by other signals on the two stressed benchmarks. The comparison is restricted to training-curve-level signals; comparisons against effective rank, Hessian sharpness, Fisher information, margin, and neural-collapse measures, which are the strongest competitors in the current literature, are not part of the present study and remain open. The observation is presented as an in-distribution training-quality probe among a family of candidate probes, and an inexpensive detection procedure suitable for logging alongside a standard training loop is provided.
Abstract:The number of discrete class-separability jumps observed during ResNet finetuning is examined empirically as a predictor of final test accuracy. Across 75 experiments spanning four benchmarks (CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, TinyImageNet, and CIFAR-10-C) and three architectures (ResNet-18, ResNet-50, and ResNet-101), with five to ten seeds per configuration, a strong within-dataset negative correlation is obtained on standard i.i.d. classification benchmarks: \(r = -0.84\) on CIFAR-10 (\(p < 10^{-8}\), \(n = 30\)) and \(r = -0.87\) on CIFAR-100 (\(p < 10^{-5}\), \(n = 15\)). Under distributional stress, the relationship attenuates: TinyImageNet yields \(r = -0.45\), and the CIFAR-10-C corruption benchmark yields \(r = -0.19\). Two additional analyses discipline the empirical claim. A partial correlation controlling for architecture depth, treated as a linear covariate, shows that on CIFAR-100 the transition count retains statistically significant predictive power (\(r_{\mathrm{partial}} = -0.69\), \(p = 0.007\)); the corresponding result under the stricter categorical conditioning is not established at \(n = 15\). A comparison against six alternative training-curve signals shows that transition count achieved the strongest correlation among the evaluated signals on CIFAR-100 and one of the strongest on CIFAR-10, but is dominated by other signals on the two stressed benchmarks. The comparison is restricted to training-curve-level signals; comparisons against effective rank, Hessian sharpness, Fisher information, margin, and neural-collapse measures, which are the strongest competitors in the current literature, are not part of the present study and remain open. The observation is presented as an in-distribution training-quality probe among a family of candidate probes, and an inexpensive detection procedure suitable for logging alongside a standard training loop is provided.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2609.05194 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2609.05194v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.05194 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 356 words
Related coverage

News
Quantum Computing Report · Jul 25, 2026

News
Quantum Computing Report · Jun 7, 2026
Synthesis Superintelligence: from Semiconductors to Superconductors — Periodic Labs’ Liam Fedus and Ekin Dogus Cubuk
Latent Space · Oct 8, 2026
News Archive 2026
Quantum Computing Report · Jul 25, 2026