mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Ghosts of Softmax: Complex Singularities That Limit Safe Step Sizes in Cross-Entropy

arXiv 2603.13552 ↗First posted 13 Mar 2026cs.LG cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Optimization analyses for cross-entropy training rely on local Taylor models of the loss to predict whether a proposed step will decrease the objective. These surrogates are reliable only inside the Taylor convergence radius of the true loss along the update direction. That radius is set not by real-line curvature alone but by the nearest complex singularity. For cross-entropy, the softmax partition function F=sumj exp(zj) has complex zeros -- ``ghosts of softmax'' -- that induce logarithmic singularities in the loss and cap this radius. To make this geometry usable, we derive closed-form expressions under logit linearization along the proposed update direction. In the binary case, the exact radius is ρ^*=√δ2+ π2/Deltaa. In the multiclass case, we obtain the lower bound ρa=π/Deltaa, where Deltaa=maxk ak-mink ak is the spread of directional logit derivatives ak=nabla zk· v. This bound costs one Jacobian-vector product and reveals what makes a step fragile: samples that are both near a decision flip and highly sensitive to the proposed direction tighten the radius. The normalized step size r=τ/ρa separates safe from dangerous updates. Across six tested architectures and multiple step directions, no model fails for r<1, yet collapse appears once r≥ 1. Temperature scaling confirms the mechanism: normalizing by ρa shrinks the onset-threshold spread from standard deviation 0.992 to 0.164. A controller that enforces τ≤ρa survives learning-rate spikes up to 10, 000× in our tests, where gradient clipping still collapses. Together, these results identify a geometric constraint on cross-entropy optimization that operates through Taylor convergence rather than Hessian curvature.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Mar 2026.

Builds on

18 of 40 references.

References · 18

  1. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  2. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 13,958
  3. 2015Rethinking the Inception Architecture for Computer Visioncited by 5,451
  4. 2022PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathwayscited by 5,304
  5. 2016SGDR: Stochastic Gradient Descent with Warm Restartscited by 4,993
  6. 2016Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networkscited by 4,718
  7. 2016Gaussian Error Linear Units (GELUs)cited by 3,431
  8. 2020GLU Variants Improve Transformercited by 1,724
  9. 2017Sigmoid-Weighted Linear Units for Neural Network Function Approximation in Reinforcement Learningcited by 935
  10. 2017Regularizing Neural Networks by Penalizing Confident Output Distributionscited by 461
  11. 2021Gradient Descent on Neural Networks Typically Occurs at the Edge of Stabilitycited by 413
  12. 2019Why gradient clipping accelerates training: A theoretical justification for adaptivitycited by 335
6 more
  1. 2022Tensor Programs V: Tuning Large Neural Networks via Zero-Shot Hyperparameter Transfercited by 272
  2. 2020The large learning rate phase of deep learning: the catapult mechanismcited by 206
  3. 2020Temperature check: theory and practice for training models with softmax-cross-entropy lossescited by 31
  4. 2016Neural Taylor Approximations: Convergence and Exploration in Rectifier Networkscited by 9
  5. 2025On the Surprising Effectiveness of Large Learning Rates under Standard Width Scalingcited by 6
  6. 2026What Trace Powers Reveal About Log-Determinants: Closed-Form Estimators, Certificates, and Failure Modescited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.