A Neural Scaling Law from Lottery Ticket Ensembling

Ziming Liu, Max Tegmark
10/3/2023
cs.LGcs.AIphysics.data-an

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Neural scaling laws (NSL) refer to the phenomenon where model performance improves with scale. Sharma & Kaplan analyzed NSL using approximation theory and predict that MSE losses decay as $N^{-α}$, $α=4/d$, where $N$ is the number of model parameters, and $d$ is the intrinsic input dimension. Although their theory works well for some cases (e.g., ReLU networks), we surprisingly find that a simple 1D problem $y=x^2$ manifests a different scaling law ($α=1$) from their predictions ($α=4$). We opened the neural networks and found that the new scaling law originates from lottery ticket ensembling: a wider network on average has more "lottery tickets", which are ensembled to reduce the variance of outputs. We support the ensembling mechanism by mechanistically interpreting single neural networks, as well as studying them statistically. We attribute the $N^{-1}$ scaling law to the "central limit theorem" of lottery tickets. Finally, we discuss its potential implications for large language models and statistical physics-type theories of learning.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{liu2023neural,
  title  = {A Neural Scaling Law from Lottery Ticket Ensembling},
  author = {Ziming Liu and Max Tegmark},
  year   = {2023},
  eprint = {2310.02258},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.02258v2}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2310.02258.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2310.02258)

Discussion