Curvature-Aligned Probing for Local Loss-Landscape Stabilization
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Local loss-landscape stabilization under sample growth is typically measured either pointwise or through isotropic averaging in the full parameter space. Despite practical value, both choices probe directions that contribute little to the dominant local deformation of strongly anisotropic neural landscapes. We recast stabilization as an observational problem and introduce a unified family of criteria parameterized by an aggregation order and a probing distribution; within this family we propose a curvature-aligned criterion Delta2(D) that probes the loss increment field in the top-D eigenspace of the empirical Hessian near a trained solution. Solely from a local quadratic model, we prove that Delta2(D) preserves the O(k-2) mean-squared rate of the full-space criterion while replacing ambient-dimension curvature dependence with dependence on the subspace dimension D; a corollary gives a closed-form spectral expression and a proposition identifies the top-D eigenspace as extremal within the eigenspace-aligned family. We also derive scalable estimators based on Hessian-vector products, subspace Monte Carlo, and a closed-form Gaussian-moment proxy. On a decoder-only transformer, a curvature-aligned probe occupying a tiny fraction of parameter space already reproduces the full-space mean-squared signal to within numerical noise throughout the validated local regime, and the closed-form estimator is orders of magnitude faster than direct Monte Carlo after subspace construction.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Apr 2026.
Builds on
22 of 28 references.
References · 22
- 2017Understanding Black-box Predictions via Influence Functionscited by 1,741
- 2020Sharpness-Aware Minimization for Efficiently Improving Generalizationcited by 1,417
- 2016On Large-Batch Training for Deep Learning: Generalization Gap and Sharp Minimacited by 1,352
- 2017Visualizing the Loss Landscape of Neural Netscited by 1,130
- 2018Loss Surfaces, Mode Connectivity, and Fast Ensembling of DNNscited by 588
- 2015Train faster, generalize better: Stability of stochastic gradient descentcited by 552
- 2017Sharp Minima Can Generalize For Deep Netscited by 466
- 2018Measuring the Intrinsic Dimension of Objective Landscapescited by 370
- 2018Essentially No Barriers in Neural Network Energy Landscapecited by 330
- 2019PyHessian: Neural Networks Through the Lens of the Hessiancited by 292
- 2017Empirical Analysis of the Hessian of Over-Parametrized Neural Networkscited by 290
- 2018Gradient Descent Happens in a Tiny Subspacecited by 217
10 more
- 2019On the Accuracy of Influence Functions for Measuring Group Effectscited by 147
- 2021Geometry of the Loss Landscape in Overparameterized Neural Networks: Symmetries and Invariancescited by 127
- 2019Sharper bounds for uniformly stable algorithmscited by 93
- 2019On Second-Order Group Influence Functions for Black-Box Predictionscited by 79
- 2018A Swiss Army Infinitesimal Jackknifecited by 54
- 2021Analytic Insights into Structure and Rank of Neural Network Hessian Mapscited by 52
- 2020Dissecting Hessian: Understanding Common Structure of Hessian in Neural Networkscited by 45
- 2025Explicit Eigenvalue Regularization Improves Sharpness-Aware Minimizationcited by 21
- 2024Neglected Hessian component explains mysteries in Sharpness regularizationcited by 12
- 2024Unraveling the Hessian: A Key to Smooth Convergence in Loss Function Landscapescited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.