mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Avoiding unsafe sets when training with Langevin Dynamics

arXiv 2607.07538 ↗First posted 8 Jul 2026cs.LG math.AP stat.MLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Training a model with noisy gradient descent can be idealized as overdamped Langevin dynamics, and a natural safety question is to bound the probability nut(AH) = mathbbP(Qt ∈ AH) that the trajectory lies in a designated failure region AH. We study this for a smooth, strongly convex loss in d dimensions, with AH separated from the minimizer by an energy gap. At the end of training, the equilibrium mass π(AH) is exponentially small in d, with a complementary energy-barrier rate when the noise is small. Along the trajectory, a shape-free bound nut(AH) ≤ π(AH)(1 + √chi02/π(AH),e-mt) shows the in-set probability relaxes to (twice) the static value after a burn-in of order d, using only the global spectral gap m. A worked Ornstein-Uhlenbeck example shows this burn-in is necessary: an angular slice of the equilibrium shell can transiently swell by a factor exponential in d, though its equilibrium mass is tiny. To rule this out we introduce a local relaxation rate, defined through the spectral measure of the region's centered indicator rather than a Dirichlet-form Rayleigh quotient. For geometrically isolated regions this rate exceeds the global one, shrinking the burn-in, and with a maximum-principle ceiling it caps the trajectory probability uniformly in time. Strong convexity sets how fast training relaxes, but the shape of the unsafe set decides whether the trajectory bulges through it on the way to equilibrium.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jul 2026.

Builds on

12 of 30 references.

References · 12

  1. 2017Stochastic Gradient Descent as Approximate Bayesian Inferencecited by 298
  2. 2019Risks from Learned Optimization in Advanced Machine Learning Systemscited by 250
  3. 2017Non-convex learning via Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamics: a nonasymptotic analysiscited by 242
  4. 2019Rapid Convergence of the Unadjusted Langevin Algorithm: Isoperimetry Sufficescited by 224
  5. 2022Defining and Characterizing Reward Hackingcited by 184
  6. 2021On the Origin of Implicit Regularization in Stochastic Gradient Descentcited by 183
  7. 2020Implicit Gradient Regularizationcited by 145
  8. 2018Stochastic Modified Equations and Dynamics of Stochastic Gradient Algorithms I: Mathematical Foundationscited by 109
  9. 2017A Hitting Time Analysis of Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamicscited by 70
  10. 2020Convergence of Langevin Monte Carlo in Chi-Squared and Renyi Divergencecited by 42
  11. 2021On Large Batch Training and Sharp Minima: A Fokker-Planck Perspectivecited by 5
  12. 2026Safety from Honesty in a Disinterested AI Predictorcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.