analiza aiqbench
This research investigates the unique optimization dynamics of growing neural network structures during training, revealing that newly inserted units often receive significantly weaker gradient signals than existing ones. The study demonstrates that the effectiveness of structural growth is highly dependent on where new capacity is added within residual networks and whether these "newborn" units have sufficient time to integrate before further architectural changes occur. For practitioners in dynamic or continual learning scenarios, this highlights a critical trade-off between rapid adaptation and the trainability of emergent subnetworks.
On the Stability of Growth in Structural Plasticity: Forward-Active yet Backward-Starved
arXiv:2605.15435v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Standard deep-learning pipelines usually choose the network architecture before training and keep it fixed throughout optimization. In contrast, a model can also be adapted by editing its structure during training, for example by pruning existing hidden units or growing new ones; however, growth is not simply the inverse of pruning. Pruning selects among units trained from initialization, whereas growth inserts new capacity into an already specialized optimization trajectory. We isolate this insertion problem and show that newborn units can be forward-active yet backward-starved, receiving substantially weaker gradient signal than incumbent units. This asymmetry is weak in small MLPs but emerges in more challenging convolutional settings, where \textsc{Grow} reaches competitive final architectures despite weaker trajectory-level performance. Extending structural edits to residual networks reveals a strong dependence on edit location: head-localized growth produces concentrated but task-aligned representations and faster bounded label remapping, whereas growth throughout the residual hierarchy yields lower effective feature support, and a lower bounded adaptation endpoint. Interventions targeting optimizer state, insertion, selection, and trainability improve newborn integration, but not necessarily final subnetwork quality. Across continual-learning benchmarks, growth is most competitive when newborn units have sufficient time and trainability to integrate. Therefore, \textsc{Grow} should be evaluated not only by the architecture it ultimately discovers, but by whether late-arriving capacity becomes usable before a new structural change occurs during training.
Abstract:Standard deep-learning pipelines usually choose the network architecture before training and keep it fixed throughout optimization. In contrast, a model can also be adapted by editing its structure during training, for example by pruning existing hidden units or growing new ones; however, growth is not simply the inverse of pruning. Pruning selects among units trained from initialization, whereas growth inserts new capacity into an already specialized optimization trajectory. We isolate this insertion problem and show that newborn units can be forward-active yet backward-starved, receiving substantially weaker gradient signal than incumbent units. This asymmetry is weak in small MLPs but emerges in more challenging convolutional settings, where \textsc{Grow} reaches competitive final architectures despite weaker trajectory-level performance. Extending structural edits to residual networks reveals a strong dependence on edit location: head-localized growth produces concentrated but task-aligned representations and faster bounded label remapping, whereas growth throughout the residual hierarchy yields lower effective feature support, and a lower bounded adaptation endpoint. Interventions targeting optimizer state, insertion, selection, and trainability improve newborn integration, but not necessarily final subnetwork quality. Across continual-learning benchmarks, growth is most competitive when newborn units have sufficient time and trainability to integrate. Therefore, \textsc{Grow} should be evaluated not only by the architecture it ultimately discovers, but by whether late-arriving capacity becomes usable before a new structural change occurs during training.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Neural and Evolutionary Computing (cs.NE)
arXiv:2605.15435 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2605.15435v3 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.15435 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 316 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
On the Stability of Growth in Structural Plasticity
arXiv · 12 iun. 2026

Stock Market Today Highlights, Sept 2: Sensex ends 373 pts lower at 76, 570, Nifty below 24, 000; Asian Paints, HDFC Bank fall most
thehindubusinessline.com · 2 sept. 2026
Links #5: 2026/07
LessWrong · 31 iul. 2026

BRICS Draws a New Global Line: Full Text of New Delhi Declaration
slguardian.org · 12 sept. 2026