From 66fe7f5af856e4d3d2eff2a9d929bcd7ffdb94e8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: YurenHao0426 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2026 11:01:35 -0500 Subject: Add contribution roadmap and phase transition plot --- notes/19_phase_transition_visualization.md | 162 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 162 insertions(+) create mode 100644 notes/19_phase_transition_visualization.md (limited to 'notes/19_phase_transition_visualization.md') diff --git a/notes/19_phase_transition_visualization.md b/notes/19_phase_transition_visualization.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a2672c2 --- /dev/null +++ b/notes/19_phase_transition_visualization.md @@ -0,0 +1,162 @@ +# Phase Transition Visualization + +This note records the first clean phase-transition visualization for the +capacity-exhaustion contribution. + +## Goal + +We want a figure that shows: + +```text +available FA capacity decreases +-> redundant directions are exhausted +-> FA/BP train gap opens +-> gap grows while BP remains capable +``` + +The key x-axis is the hard FA capacity margin: + +```text +M_FA = P - K_FA - N*out +``` + +where: + +- `P` is the parameter count; +- `K_FA` is the hard feedback-alignment constraint count; +- `N*out` is the random-label task dimension. + +The predicted transition is at: + +```text +M_FA = 0 +``` + +## Experiment + +This run uses SGD, not Adam. + +Configuration: + +```text +task: random-label regression +architecture: 16 -> width -> width -> 4 +widths: 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 48, 64, 96 +train samples: 128 +optimizer: full-batch SGD +learning rate: 0.01 +steps: 3000 +init seeds: 4 +feedback seeds per init: 8 +FA trajectories: 256 +``` + +Output directory: + +```text +outputs/phase_transition_sgd_256_lr001_T3000 +``` + +Main figures: + +```text +outputs/phase_transition_sgd_256_lr001_T3000/phase_transition_capacity_exhaustion.png +outputs/phase_transition_sgd_256_lr001_T3000/phase_transition_gap_only.png +``` + +## Result + +Summary: + +| width | FA margin | BP train | FA train | FA-BP train gap | +|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:| +| 96 | 1026 | 0.000249 | 0.009436 | 0.009187 | +| 64 | 514 | 0.003354 | 0.053192 | 0.049838 | +| 48 | 258 | 0.016732 | 0.146680 | 0.129947 | +| 32 | 2 | 0.089511 | 0.386777 | 0.297266 | +| 24 | -126 | 0.201897 | 0.600796 | 0.398899 | +| 16 | -254 | 0.547408 | 0.993219 | 0.445812 | +| 12 | -318 | 0.872346 | 1.204686 | 0.332340 | +| 8 | -382 | 1.260234 | 1.443789 | 0.183555 | + +The gap is small in the redundant region: + +```text +M_FA > 0 +``` + +It rises sharply around the hard FA capacity boundary: + +```text +M_FA ≈ 0 +``` + +and becomes largest in the FA-deficient but BP-capable region: + +```text +M_FA < 0 +and +M_BP = P - N*out > 0 +``` + +At the smallest widths, BP itself also becomes under-capacity: + +```text +M_BP < 0 +``` + +In that both-deficient regime, the FA-BP gap decreases because both methods +fail to fit the random labels. + +## Interpretation + +The visual story is not simply "smaller network means larger gap." The clean +phase-transition story is: + +1. high redundancy: + ```text + M_FA >> 0 + ``` + BP and FA both have enough effective room, so the train gap is small. + +2. FA redundancy exhausted: + ```text + M_FA crosses 0 + ``` + FA starts paying the feedback-alignment burden in task-relevant directions, + so the gap opens. + +3. FA-deficient but BP-capable: + ```text + M_FA < 0, M_BP > 0 + ``` + the gap grows and peaks. + +4. both-deficient: + ```text + M_BP < 0 + ``` + BP also cannot memorize, so the difference between FA and BP no longer + grows monotonically. + +This is the right phase-transition framing for the paper. + +## Caveat + +The hard margin is intentionally simple. It uses: + +```text +K_FA = (width*width - 1) + (width*out - 1) +``` + +for the two-hidden-layer MLP. It predicts the transition location well enough +to provide a clean regime variable, but the exact peak is shifted because real +FA alignment is soft, not a hard rank constraint. + +Do not claim that hard capacity margin alone predicts the exact final train +gap. The correct claim is: + +```text +hard FA margin predicts the regime where the gap opens; +tangent/operator dynamics or empirical trajectories determine the gap size. +``` -- cgit v1.2.3