aiqbench analysis
This paper addresses a critical theoretical challenge in Bayesian deep learning by analyzing how likelihood tempering resolves "prior dominance" in wide variational neural networks. The authors derive precise phase transitions for predictive moments as network width scales, offering a rigorous framework to balance regularization terms and recover exact posterior limits.
The Impact of Likelihood Tempering on the Limiting Predictive Moments of Variational Bayesian Linear Neural Networks
arXiv:2610.09132v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In wide Bayesian neural networks, Gaussian mean-field variational inference is prone to "prior dominance": the Kullback-Leibler (KL) regularization term of the ELBO outweighs the expected log-likelihood, and the variational predictive distribution collapses to the prior predictive as the width $M$ grows. Tempering the likelihood, by raising it to the power $1/T$ for a temperature $T 0$, as $M \to \infty$ and compare it with the untempered neural network Gaussian process (NNGP) posterior, the infinite-width limit of the exact posterior. Our main result is that the predictive expectation and variance undergo phase transitions at different scales: the limiting expectation leaves its prior value at $c = 1/2$, once $\tau$ falls below an explicit threshold, and equals the least-squares prediction for $c > 1/2$, whereas the limiting variance keeps its prior value for $c 1$. With suitable choices of $\tau,c$, one can recover either the NNGP posterior expectation or its variance.
Abstract:In wide Bayesian neural networks, Gaussian mean-field variational inference is prone to "prior dominance": the Kullback-Leibler (KL) regularization term of the ELBO outweighs the expected log-likelihood, and the variational predictive distribution collapses to the prior predictive as the width $M$ grows. Tempering the likelihood, by raising it to the power $1/T$ for a temperature $T < 1$, is equivalent to scaling the KL term by $T$. We ask in this paper how fast $T$ must decrease with $M$ to counteract this degeneracy and strike a good balance between the two terms. For single-hidden-layer linear networks with isotropic Gaussian priors, we derive the limiting predictive distribution under schedules of the form $T = \tau/M^{c}$, with constants $\tau, c > 0$, as $M \to \infty$ and compare it with the untempered neural network Gaussian process (NNGP) posterior, the infinite-width limit of the exact posterior. Our main result is that the predictive expectation and variance undergo phase transitions at different scales: the limiting expectation leaves its prior value at $c = 1/2$, once $\tau$ falls below an explicit threshold, and equals the least-squares prediction for $c > 1/2$, whereas the limiting variance keeps its prior value for $c < 1$, matches the NNGP's for $c=1$, and vanishes for $c > 1$. With suitable choices of $\tau,c$, one can recover either the NNGP posterior expectation or its variance.
Machine Learning (stat.ML); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2610.09132 [stat.ML]
(or arXiv:2610.09132v1 [stat.ML] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.09132 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 · 321 words
Related coverage

Certifying RBMs Cut NPA Hierarchy Optimization Costs by 100×
Quantum Zeitgeist · Jul 24, 2026

The PPA: A New Approach to Anthropics
LessWrong · Oct 14, 2026
J++ Lens: Jacobian Filtering Enables More Faithful Workspace Lenses
LessWrong · Oct 8, 2026

Claude Code’s Next Era — Thariq Shihipar, Anthropic
Latent Space · Sep 29, 2026