Hardness of Learning Fixed Parities with Neural Networks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Learning parity functions is a canonical problem in learning theory, which although computationally tractable, is not amenable to standard learning algorithms such as gradient-based methods. This hardness is usually explained via statistical query lower bounds [Kearns, 1998]. However, these bounds only imply that for any given algorithm, there is some worst-case parity function that will be hard to learn. Thus, they do not explain why fixed parities - say, the full parity function over all coordinates - are difficult to learn in practice, at least with standard predictors and gradient-based methods [Abbe and Boix-Adsera, 2022]. In this paper, we address this open problem, by showing that for any fixed parity of some minimal size, using it as a target function to train one-hidden-layer ReLU networks with perturbed gradient descent will fail to produce anything meaningful. To establish this, we prove a new result about the decay of the Fourier coefficients of linear threshold (or weighted majority) functions, which may be of independent interest.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Jan 2025.
Builds on
10 of 17 references.
References · 10
- 2017How to Escape Saddle Points Efficientlycited by 284
- 2017Global Convergence of Langevin Dynamics Based Algorithms for Nonconvex Optimizationcited by 96
- 2017Failures of Gradient-Based Deep Learningcited by 79
- 2017Gradient Descent Can Take Exponential Time to Escape Saddle Pointscited by 74
- 2016Fast Learning Requires Good Memory: A Time-Space Lower Bound for Parity Learningcited by 32
- 2021On the Power of Differentiable Learning versus PAC and SQ Learningcited by 27
- 2020Poly-time universality and limitations of deep learningcited by 23
- 2020Statistical Queries and Statistical Algorithms: Foundations and Applicationscited by 21
- 2022On the non-universality of deep learning: quantifying the cost of symmetrycited by 17
- 2019On Symmetry and Initialization for Neural Networkscited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 5.
7 papers.
- 2025On the creation of narrow AI: hierarchy and nonlocality of neural network skillscited by 4
- 2025Learning Fricke signs from Maass form Coefficientscited by 1
- 2026Differentiable Logic Synthesis: Spectral Coefficient Selection via Sinkhorn-Constrained Compositioncited by 1
- 2026When Is Compositional Reasoning Learnable from Verifiable Rewards?cited by 1
- 2026The two clocks and the innovation window: When and how generative models learn rulescited by 1
- 2026Learning through Internalizationcited by 1
- 2026Teacher Geometry Shapes Learnability in Teacher-Student Networkscited by 0
- 2026Teacher Geometry Shapes Learnability in Teacher-Student Networks9 Sep 2026
- 2026Learning through Internalization18 Jun 2026
- 2026The two clocks and the innovation window: When and how generative models learn rules11 May 2026
- 2026When Is Compositional Reasoning Learnable from Verifiable Rewards?8 Feb 2026
- 2026Differentiable Logic Synthesis: Spectral Coefficient Selection via Sinkhorn-Constrained Composition20 Jan 2026
- 2025On the creation of narrow AI: hierarchy and nonlocality of neural network skills21 May 2025
- 2025Learning Fricke signs from Maass form Coefficients3 Jan 2025