mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Structure-Specific Representational Priors Causally Control the Grokking Delay

arXiv 2607.04333 ↗First posted 5 Jul 2026cs.LGcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Grokking -- generalization long after training-set interpolation -- has been accelerated by structure-agnostic interventions (gradient filtering, weight-norm clamping, geometric penalties). Whether the delay specifically measures the time to form task-structured representations has remained observational. We test it causally by injecting representational priors of varying content into a one-layer transformer learning modular addition, via a supervised-contrastive loss whose positives encode (i) the task's true structure ((a+b) bmod p), (ii) a coherent-but-wrong sibling ((a-b) bmod p), or (iii) a random partition -- all with identical loss form, strength, class sizes, and geometry. Whether generalization occurs follows a clean gradation: true 22/30 runs, sibling (same periodic features, wrong combination) 14/15, random (only memorizable) 0/20 (Fisher p=1.3×10-7). A weight-norm-matched control replaying the norm trajectory onto plain cross-entropy generalizes 0/15, ruling out the norm as mediator. Probes show structure formation precedes and predicts generalization in all runs. Only the true structure also accelerates grokking (up to 2.75×), but this is dose-dependent and bimodal. We then confirm the mechanism by prediction: because the acceleration is gated by a weight-norm side-effect, clamping the norm during training yields a reliable, standalone accelerator with a median 8.6× speedup (up to 22× on the fastest seeds, under 1000 epochs), growing monotonically as the norm is held lower; the residual stalls also vanish, though significant only pooled over the two mitigations run at both strengths (0/40 vs 6/20, p=7.7×10-4), not per method. The grokking delay is, causally, the time to form the right representational structure -- decided at the level of features, not labels.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Jul 2026.

Builds on

17 of 17 references.

References · 17

  1. 2020Supervised Contrastive Learningcited by 2,829
  2. 2019Similarity of Neural Network Representations Revisitedcited by 1,755
  3. 2023Progress measures for grokking via mechanistic interpretabilitycited by 839
  4. 2022Grokking: Generalization Beyond Overfitting on Small Algorithmic Datasetscited by 629
  5. 2022Towards Understanding Grokking: An Effective Theory of Representation Learningcited by 230
  6. 2022Omnigrok: Grokking Beyond Algorithmic Datacited by 146
  7. 2023Explaining grokking through circuit efficiencycited by 111
  8. 2023Grokking modular arithmeticcited by 83
  9. 2024Grokfast: Accelerated Grokking by Amplifying Slow Gradientscited by 41
  10. 2026Model Capacity Determines Grokking through Competing Memorisation and Generalisation Speedscited by 4
  11. 2026The Weight Norm Sets the Grokking Timescale: A Causal Delay Lawcited by 4
  12. 2025NeuralGrok: Accelerate Grokking by Neural Gradient Transformationcited by 2
5 more
  1. 2026Two Speeds of Learning: A Representation-Readout Decomposition of Grokking and Double Descentcited by 2
  2. 2026Beyond Neural Collapse: Task-Intrinsic Geometry Governs Neural Representations in Modular Arithmeticcited by 2
  3. 2026Learned Structure Shows Up Earlier in the Task's Own Basis: A Controlled Look at a Synchronisation Precursor in Grokkingcited by 2
  4. 2026What Does the Weight Norm Control in Grokking? Logit-Scale Mediation under Cross-Entropycited by 1
  5. 2026Radial Suppression Accelerates Algorithmic Generalization: A Geometric Analysis of Delayed Generalizationcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.