arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.09621

When does a network's training history predict its future learning better than its current state? Evidence from a response probe and a forecasting screen

Martin Hofmann·Patrick Mäder
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Networks that behave alike now can still learn differently when training continues. Work on loss of plasticity and critical periods shows that the path to a state shapes what follows; it does not show whether the path carries information that a measurement of the state itself misses. We ask when the training history of a network predicts its future learning better than its current state. In a main study, small multilayer perceptrons were trained under three history regimes (42 histories), and future learning was measured at four checkpoints by a short probe: a copy of the network trained for 100 updates on a new task. Before the prediction result was read, the protocol checked the probe. It responded monotonically to a function-preserving rescaling of hidden units, repeated measurements agreed (intraclass correlation 0.940, [0.903, 0.997], in the least reliable class, mean of three repeats), and a re-initialisation of units was visible directly after it but not 100 to 200 updates later. A history state of at most four dimensions did not improve on a calibrated model of the current state (gain -21.4%, 90% interval [-91.9, 8.1]; required in advance: 10%). A companion screen on 1,560 synthetic regression runs asked the same question for a target further away, the final error of the run. There, history models forecast better than the current validation error after 12 of up to 240 epochs (compact state 30.3%, [15.8, 39.4], a contextual comparison) and were not distinguishable from it after 48. In both studies the history was informative only while the current state was not yet informative about the target; this reading was formed after the results.

Explore related subjects

cs.LG

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Martin Hofmann, Patrick Mäder. 2026-10-07. When does a network's training history predict its future learning better than its current state? Evidence from a response probe and a forecasting screen. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.09621

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Learning in the Recurrent State: Gradient Descent with Linear Recurrent Networks

In-context learning lets a sequence model adapt to a new task from examples in its input. A prominent line of work shows how self-attention can be constructed to implement gradient descent on a linear predictor fit to the in-context examples during the forward pass. State-space models (SSMs) and other linear recurrent networks (LRNNs) model sequences at linear time cost, but it is unclear how their recurrent update could carry out the same in-context gradient descent. We introduce Gradient-based Recurrent In-context Learner (GRIL), a diagonal LRNN that factorizes a supervised gradient step into a short-window cross-product write and a multiplicative readout of the next query. For linear regression, this construction accumulates the context gradient in a matrix state and applies it in a single forward pass, with $O(f^2)$ learned degrees of freedom. The same design extends to multi-step updates and cross-entropy classification, with a limited MLP-based extension to non-linear regression. We show empirically that trained GRILs recover the behavior and parameters analytically predicted by the construction on synthetic ICL tasks. Furthermore, the same architecture can be extended and trained on general-purpose benchmarks, including Long Range Arena, language modeling and associative recall. Together, these results establish windowed cross-product self-attention as a concrete inductive bias that lets LRNNs learn in context through gradient-descent-like updates, while remaining trainable on general-purpose tasks.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

LLaTA: Unlocking Graph Structure Learning with Tree-Guided Large Language Models

The emergence of large language models (LLMs) has popularized text-attributed graphs (TAGs), creating an urgent need for graph structure learning (GSL) methods that effectively leverage textual information. However, existing GSL approaches are designed for traditional graphs without text, and adapting them to LLMs faces two challenges: defining a suitable optimization objective given LLMs' massive parameters, and designing an efficient architecture without costly fine-tuning. To address these, we propose LLaTA (Large Language and Tree Assistant), which reformulates GSL as a tree optimization framework---shifting from training edge predictors to designing a language-aware tree sampler. LLaTA constructs structural encoding trees via entropy minimization to capture topology, then leverages tree-guided LLM in-context learning to integrate textual semantics without fine-tuning. Extensive experiments on 11 datasets demonstrate LLaTA's flexibility with any backbone, superior scalability over LLM-based GSL methods, and state-of-the-art effectiveness across diverse domains.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Causal Posterior Estimation

We present Causal Posterior Estimation (CPE), a novel method for Bayesian inference in simulator models, where evaluating the likelihood function is intractable or computationally expensive, but generating outputs given parameter values is straightforward. CPE approximates the posterior distribution using flow matching while directly incorporating the conditional dependence structure induced by the model's graphical representation into the neural network architecture. Across extensive experiments, we demonstrate that hard-coding these conditional dependencies into the network, rather than requiring them to be learned from data, enables CPE to achieve highly accurate posterior inference that matches or outperforms state-of-the-art baselines.

cs.LG↗