summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/results/confirmatory/persample/ep_s456.csv
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorYurenHao0426 <Blackhao0426@gmail.com>2026-04-07 22:48:18 -0500
committerYurenHao0426 <Blackhao0426@gmail.com>2026-04-07 22:48:18 -0500
commitc2e145e162444b31ac5c66a90daa6bc0a1cda591 (patch)
treead38ef6b7295ecdb3de67e4474d89548e9ca80ba /results/confirmatory/persample/ep_s456.csv
parent3a520b203f4f0c75b37b2d5c34d461718729ea02 (diff)
Add random-init sanity check: protocol does not flag untrained networks
3-seed random init ResMLP gives chance accuracy (~10%) but the protocol verdict is 'trustworthy' on all 3 seeds: - residual norms ~8.7 across all layers (no growth, bounded) - BP gradient norms ~8e-3 (healthy, well above 1e-7 floor) - cross-batch stability 0.08-0.18 (in the BP/EP range) This is the answer to the likely reviewer question: 'is your protocol just flagging anything that doesn't perform well?' Answer: no. Random init is at chance and the protocol passes it. The walked-back trained methods are walked back because of the *measurements*, not because of the accuracy. Notable: random init g-norms (8e-3) are actually HIGHER than BP-trained ones (4e-4) — BP training reduces the gradient magnitude as loss decreases. So the protocol distinguishes 3 distinct regimes: (1) untrained healthy, (2) trained-and-still-healthy (BP/EP), (3) trained-into-pathology (DFA/SB/CB).
Diffstat (limited to 'results/confirmatory/persample/ep_s456.csv')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions