mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The Norm-Separation Delay Law of Grokking: A First-Principles Theory of Delayed Generalization

arXiv 2603.13331 ↗First posted 5 Mar 2026cs.AI cs.LGcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Grokking -- the sudden generalisation that appears long after a model has perfectly memorised its training data -- has been widely observed but lacks a quantitative theory explaining the length of the delay. We show that grokking is a norm-driven representational phase transition in regularised training dynamics, and establish the Norm-Separation Delay Law: Tgrok - Tmem = Theta(γeff-1 log(|θmem|2 / |θpost|2)), where γeff is the optimiser's effective contraction rate (γeff = ηλ for SGD, γeff ≥ ηλ for AdamW). The upper bound follows from a discrete Lyapunov contraction argument; the matching lower bound from dynamical constraints of regularised first-order optimisation. Across 293 training runs spanning modular addition, modular multiplication, and sparse parity, we confirm three falsifiable predictions: inverse scaling with weight decay (R2 = 0.97), inverse scaling with learning rate (R2 = 0.92), and logarithmic dependence on the norm ratio (Pearson r = 0.91). A fourth finding reveals that grokking requires an optimiser capable of decoupling memorisation from contraction: SGD fails entirely at the same hyperparameters where AdamW reliably groks. These results reframe grokking not as a mysterious optimisation artefact but as a predictable consequence of norm separation between competing interpolating representations. We further derive a practical three-input algorithm that predicts grokking delay at memorisation time with 34.6% mean absolute error (bootstrap 95% CI [30.0%, 39.4%], N=60 seeds), enabling principled early stopping.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Mar 2026.

Builds on

20 of 36 references.

References · 20

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2018Neural Tangent Kernel: Convergence and Generalization in Neural Networkscited by 2,597
  3. 2016Optimization Methods for Large-Scale Machine Learningcited by 1,140
  4. 2018Reconciling modern machine learning practice and the bias-variance trade-offcited by 919
  5. 2023Progress measures for grokking via mechanistic interpretabilitycited by 822
  6. 2019Wide Neural Networks of Any Depth Evolve as Linear Models Under Gradient Descentcited by 732
  7. 2018On Lazy Training in Differentiable Programmingcited by 671
  8. 2019Deep Double Descent: Where Bigger Models and More Data Hurtcited by 667
  9. 2017The Implicit Bias of Gradient Descent on Separable Datacited by 649
  10. 2022Grokking: Generalization Beyond Overfitting on Small Algorithmic Datasetscited by 599
  11. 2019On Exact Computation with an Infinitely Wide Neural Netcited by 572
  12. 2019Benign Overfitting in Linear Regressioncited by 544
8 more
  1. 2019Gradient Descent Maximizes the Margin of Homogeneous Neural Networkscited by 308
  2. 2022Hidden Progress in Deep Learning: SGD Learns Parities Near the Computational Limitcited by 184
  3. 2022Omnigrok: Grokking Beyond Algorithmic Datacited by 142
  4. 2023A Toy Model of Universality: Reverse Engineering How Networks Learn Group Operationscited by 141
  5. 2023Explaining grokking through circuit efficiencycited by 105
  6. 2022The Slingshot Mechanism: An Empirical Study of Adaptive Optimizers and the Grokking Phenomenoncited by 90
  7. 2023Dichotomy of Early and Late Phase Implicit Biases Can Provably Induce Grokkingcited by 76
  8. 2023Unifying Grokking and Double Descentcited by 49

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 6.

6 papers.