mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Wavelet-Based Parity Detection Revisited: Representation Dependence, Generalization, and Mechanistic Analysis

arXiv 2511.00071 ↗First posted 29 Oct 2025cs.LG eess.SPcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Parity is exactly determined by the least significant bit (LSB), so machine learning is unnecessary for solving the task. This work instead uses parity as a controlled diagnostic for studying how a classical signal-processing pipeline preserves, amplifies, or suppresses access to symbolic information embedded in a numerical representation. Integers from 0 to 10,000 are encoded as fixed-width 32-bit binary signals, decomposed with a level-3 Daubechies-2 (db2) discrete wavelet transform, summarized by mean absolute coefficient magnitude, and clustered independently per subband with k-means. Clustering is unsupervised, while cluster-to-parity calibration uses training labels only under a stratified 60/20/20 train/validation/test protocol. The frozen configuration reaches 84.26% accuracy on the held-out test set (95% Wilson CI: 82.60-85.79%), and 84.20% +/- 0.57% across 20 stratified resplits. Raw binary summary statistics reach 61.30%, while masking the LSB reduces validation accuracy to 48.15%, consistent with chance. The A3 approximation band alone retains 83.20%, whereas detail bands remain near chance. Performance is strongly representation-dependent: moving the parity bit changes validation accuracy up to 98.60%, and changing the wavelet boundary mode ranges from 54.45% to 83.20%. Cross-magnitude extrapolation degrades from 79.98% on 10,001-20,000 to 59.69% on 100,001-1,000,000. These results do not show that wavelets discover the arithmetic rule of parity. Rather, they show that information already present in the binary encoding becomes more or less recoverable depending on multiscale filtering, spatial alignment, and boundary handling.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 3 of its 15 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Oct 2025.

Builds on

3 of 15 references.

References · 3

  1. 2022Grokking: Generalization Beyond Overfitting on Small Algorithmic Datasetscited by 599
  2. 2022Hidden Progress in Deep Learning: SGD Learns Parities Near the Computational Limitcited by 184
  3. 2020Learning Parities with Neural Networkscited by 77

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Understanding Structured Financial Data with LLMs: A Case Study on Fraud Detection
  2. 2026LLMs Know More About Numbers than They Can Say
  3. 2025WaLRUS: Wavelets for Long-range Representation Using SSMs
  4. 2025LLM as an Algorithmist: Enhancing Anomaly Detectors via Programmatic Synthesis
  5. 2025CLIP Meets Diffusion: A Synergistic Approach to Anomaly Detection
  6. 2025Complex Mathematical Expression Recognition: Benchmark, Large-Scale Dataset and Strong Baseline
  7. 2024STEM-POM: Evaluating Language Models Math-Symbol Reasoning in Document Parsing
  8. 2026EmDT: Embedding Diffusion Transformer for Tabular Data Generation in Fraud Detection