Two-phase perspective on deep learning dynamics

We propose that learning in deep neural networks proceeds in two phases: a rapid curve-fitting phase followed by a slower compression or coarse-graining phase. This view is supported by the shared temporal structure of three phenomena-grokking, double descent, and the information bottleneck-all of which exhibit a delayed onset of generalization well after training error reaches zero. We empirically show that the associated timescales align in two rather different settings. Mutual information between hidden layers and input data emerges as a natural progress measure, complementing circuit-based metrics such as local complexity and the linear mapping number. We argue that the second phase is not actively optimized by standard training algorithms and may be unnecessarily prolonged. Drawing on an analogy with the renormalization group, we suggest that this compression phase reflects a principled form of forgetting, critical for generalization.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Physical review. E
Published
2025-07-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1103/3l3p-vkf2
Primary Topic
Neural Networks and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Two-phase perspective on deep learning dynamics

Animik Ghosh, Karl J. Friston
Physical review. E
Neural Networks and Applications
article

Two-phase perspective on deep learning dynamics

Animik Ghosh, Karl J. Friston
article en

Abstract

We propose that learning in deep neural networks proceeds in two phases: a rapid curve-fitting phase followed by a slower compression or coarse-graining phase. This view is supported by the shared temporal structure of three phenomena-grokking, double descent, and the information bottleneck-all of which exhibit a delayed onset of generalization well after training error reaches zero. We empirically show that the associated timescales align in two rather different settings. Mutual information between hidden layers and input data emerges as a natural progress measure, complementing circuit-based metrics such as local complexity and the linear mapping number. We argue that the second phase is not actively optimized by standard training algorithms and may be unnecessarily prolonged. Drawing on an analogy with the renormalization group, we suggest that this compression phase reflects a principled form of forgetting, critical for generalization.

Physical review. EVol. 112(2)
University of the Witwatersrand (ZA), Huzhou Normal University (CN), National Institute for Theoretical Physics (ZA)
Huzhou University
Openalex Percentile: Top 91%
Neural Networks and Applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Two-phase perspective on deep learning dynamics — Animik Ghosh, Karl J. Friston · Physical review. E (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS