Papers › Measuring Sharpness in Grokking

Measuring Sharpness in Grokking

14 Feb 2024arXiv:2402.08946archive 2025-07-28

Jack Miller, Patrick Gleeson, Charles O'Neill, Thang Bui, Noam Levi

Neural networks sometimes exhibit grokking, a phenomenon where perfect or near-perfect performance is achieved on a validation set well after the same performance has been obtained on the corresponding training set. In this workshop paper, we introduce a robust technique for measuring grokking, based on fitting an appropriate functional form. We then use this to investigate the sharpness of transitions in training and validation accuracy under two settings. The first setting is the theoretical framework developed by Levi et al. (2023) where closed form expressions are readily accessible. The second setting is a two-layer MLP trained to predict the parity of bits, with grokking induced by the concealment strategy of Miller et al. (2023). We find that trends between relative grokking gap and grokking sharpness are similar in both settings when using absolute and relative measures of sharpness. Reflecting on this, we make progress toward explaining some trends and identify the need for further study to untangle the various mechanisms which influence the sharpness of grokking.

PaperPDFCodeCode Syntology ran

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2402.08946")

Code

Syntology Ran 6 of 7 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 1 has no recorded run. Of those that ran: 6 ran with no contract checked.

By repository: official repository: 7 samples from 1 repository, 6 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

jackmiller2003/tiny-gen officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHubpytorch report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

7 samples harvested; 6 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 1 has no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

6ran
1unverified

Licence: 7 of the 7 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from jackmiller2003/tiny-gen. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

add_features_for_lr_classification jackmiller2003/tiny-gen/tools.py official repository ran fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · 34f259f02d628741 · report
combine_datasets jackmiller2003/tiny-gen/src/dataset.py official repository ran no licence file found · pointer only · e9758b9ed9724a62 · report
gaussian_loss jackmiller2003/tiny-gen/tools.py official repository ran fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · f2e62af61a2171aa · report
generate_zero_one_classification jackmiller2003/tiny-gen/src/dataset.py official repository ran no licence file found · pointer only · 1239ce880d8bb156 · report
get_accuracy jackmiller2003/tiny-gen/src/common.py official repository ran no licence file found · pointer only · 4ddde33fb0d7122b · report
l2_norm_for_lr jackmiller2003/tiny-gen/tools.py official repository ran no licence file found · pointer only · e58241cc46e5cd07 · report
mvn_log_prob jackmiller2003/tiny-gen/src/model.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 5f46d991c13efaed · report

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

SET

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections