mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Norm-Hierarchy Transitions in Representation Learning: When and Why Neural Networks Abandon Shortcuts

arXiv 2603.07323 ↗First posted 7 Mar 2026cs.LG cs.AIcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Neural networks often rely on spurious shortcuts for many epochs before discovering structured representations. However, the mechanism governing when this transition occurs and whether its timing can be predicted remains unclear. Prior work shows that gradient descent converges to low norm solutions and that neural networks exhibit simplicity bias, but neither explains the timescale of the transition from shortcut features to structured representations. We introduce the Norm-Hierarchy Transition (NHT) framework, which explains delayed representation learning as the slow traversal of a hierarchy of parameter norms during regularized optimization. When multiple interpolating solutions exist with different norms, weight decay gradually moves the model from high norm shortcut solutions toward lower norm structured representations. We derive a tight bound showing that the transition delay grows logarithmically with the ratio between shortcut and structured norms. Experiments on modular arithmetic, CIFAR-10 with spurious features, CelebA, and Waterbirds support the predictions of the framework. The results suggest that grokking, shortcut learning, and delayed feature discovery arise from a common mechanism based on norm hierarchy traversal during training.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Mar 2026.

Builds on

23 of 28 references.

References · 23

  1. 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,411
  2. 2014Deep Learning Face Attributes in the Wildcited by 3,679
  3. 2022Emergent Abilities of Large Language Modelscited by 2,483
  4. 2022Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language modelscited by 1,970
  5. 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,928
  6. 2018On the Spectral Bias of Neural Networkscited by 1,321
  7. 2019Distributionally Robust Neural Networks for Group Shifts: On the Importance of Regularization for Worst-Case Generalizationcited by 1,232
  8. 2018Reconciling modern machine learning practice and the bias-variance trade-offcited by 919
  9. 2023Progress measures for grokking via mechanistic interpretabilitycited by 822
  10. 2018On Lazy Training in Differentiable Programmingcited by 671
  11. 2019Deep Double Descent: Where Bigger Models and More Data Hurtcited by 667
  12. 2017The Implicit Bias of Gradient Descent on Separable Datacited by 649
11 more
  1. 2022Grokking: Generalization Beyond Overfitting on Small Algorithmic Datasetscited by 599
  2. 2021Just Train Twice: Improving Group Robustness without Training Group Informationcited by 522
  3. 2023Are Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models a Mirage?cited by 515
  4. 2017Sharp Minima Can Generalize For Deep Netscited by 462
  5. 2020The Pitfalls of Simplicity Bias in Neural Networkscited by 349
  6. 2019Gradient Descent Maximizes the Margin of Homogeneous Neural Networkscited by 308
  7. 2022Hidden Progress in Deep Learning: SGD Learns Parities Near the Computational Limitcited by 184
  8. 2018Deep learning generalizes because the parameter-function map is biased towards simple functionscited by 180
  9. 2023A Toy Model of Universality: Reverse Engineering How Networks Learn Group Operationscited by 141
  10. 2020Learning from Failure: Training Debiased Classifier from Biased Classifiercited by 133
  11. 2023Dichotomy of Early and Late Phase Implicit Biases Can Provably Induce Grokkingcited by 76

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.