Organizations: Center for Complex Networks and Systems Research, Luddy School of Informatics, Computing, and Engineering, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47408, USA · Department of Physics, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA · Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA
Deep neural networks and brains both learn and share superficial similarities: processing nodes are likened to neurons and adjustable weights are likened to modifiable synapses. But can a unified theoretical framework be found to underlie them both? Here we show that the equations used to describe neuronal avalanches in living brains can also be applied to cascades of activity in deep neural networks. These equations are derived from non-equilibrium statistical physics and show that deep neural networks learn best when poised between absorbing and active phases. Because these networks are strongly driven by inputs, however, they do not operate at a true critical point but within a quasi-critical regime -- one that still approximately satisfies crackling noise scaling relations. By training networks with different initializations, we show that maximal susceptibility is a more reliable predictor of learning than proximity to the critical point itself. This provides a blueprint for engineering improved network performance. Finally, using finite-size scaling we identify distinct universality classes, including Barkhausen noise and directed percolation. This theoretical framework demonstrates that universal features are shared by both biological and artificial neural networks.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Avalanches and criticality. Schematic representation of signal propagation through layers ℓ in deep neural networks. Circles are the neurons, columns of circles constitute layers of deep network, the darker they get the more active they are (higher yℓ+1 , defined in the text). Signal strength (denoted by qℓ in the text) characterizes the size of the neural gains ( zℓ ) or, also called pre-activations. Let σw2 be a control parameter, with σc2 being its critical value. When σw2>σc2 signals grow with depth, when σw2<σc2 they decay, and when in the thermodynamic limit σw2=σc2 , signals remain stable, enabling ideal information propagation. Neural networks can best preserve and process information with initializations of the weight parameters near the critical regime σw2≈σc2 . The initial signal strength defines the avalanche threshold. The cumulative signal strength above the threshold value— the area between red line and purple dashes— gives the avalanche size, S , and the number of layers it penetrates until it crosses the threshold defines the avalanche’s duration D .
Figure 2: Crackling noise statistics in Gaussian initialised deep networks. (a-b) Distributions of avalanche size S and duration D for fixed depth L=3000 and varying widths N=25,50,75,100,200,500,1000 , with zero bias σb2=0 and near-critical weights σw2≈1 . Networks are re-initialised every 5000 perturbations until ∼4×106 avalanches are collected (See Text). Maximum-likelihood fits are used to find the exponents. (c) Size–duration scaling: ⟨S⟩D∼Dγ for different widths with γ≈1.53 being the slope fitted to N=1000 — close to the theoretical prediction τs−1τd−1≈1.58 . (d-e) Finite-size extrapolation of exponents via τ(N)=τ+cN−w gives (τs,τd)→(1.34,1.53) for large N . Pink dashes show Barkhausen values with their errorbars as shades (1.33±0.05,1.50±0.07) . (f) Shape collapse analysis with optimal rescaling value γ∗≈1.58 , very close to the prediction τs−1τd−1≈1.58 (See Text and Appendices for more information).
Figure 3: Mean-field predictions and simulations of susceptibility, and learning performance. Color indicates bias variance: all curves in panels (a–e) are color-coded according to log10σb2 as shown in the legend in panel (a), ranging from σb2=0 (purple) to σb2=10−2.2 (red). (a) Steady-state signal strength qss(MF) from mean-field theory. The logarithm bases are 10. (b) Mean-field σw -susceptibility χσw2(MF) . (c) Test performance on the MNIST classification task after 10 epochs. (d) Empirical average avalanche size Sˉ , which is the sum of all recorded avalanche sizes divided by the number of recorded avalanches. (e) Empirical σw -susceptibility (from avalanche statistics χσw2=dσw2dSˉ ). Panels (c–e) are measured on networks with width N=300 and depth L=300 . (f) Epochs needed to reach 97% training accuracy for fully connected deep neural networks with L=300 , as a function of network width N and fixed σb2=0 . White regions indicate models that did not reach 97% within 50 epochs. The onset of successful learning approaches 1+ as size increases, which is expected for a finite system approaching its thermodynamic-limit transition.
Figure 4: Input magnitude and quasi-criticality. (a) avalanche size distribution, (b) duration distribution, and (c) σw -susceptibility curves for varying input magnitudes q0 . The maximum in the susceptibility shifts to larger σw2 values as the input magnitude increases from q0=0.1 to q0=1.7 at the point where the σw -susceptibility rises sharply (c). Consequently, better power laws of (a) and (b) for input magnitudes q0=0.1,1,1.7 are, respectively, obtained at σw2≈1.005,1.025,1.05 .
Figure 5: Trainability and susceptibility across initialization parameters. Heat maps show the training accuracy for MNIST (a) and CIFAR-10 (b) across the same (σw2,σb2) control-parameter space. Circles mark the locations of susceptibility peaks, with circle size proportional to the peak height. In both datasets, the susceptibility peaks track the onset of trainability, linking heightened dynamical responsiveness to the region where optimization becomes successful.
Figure 6: Avalanche statistics in ResNets exhibit crackling-noise scaling (a) The distributions of avalanche size S~ (See Text and Appendices) and (b) duration D follow power laws. The scaling of average avalanche size and duration (c) for multiple ResNet variants thresholded with n=2 , or two standard deviations above the mean activity of the layer (see Appendices), suggests crackling noise relationship. (d) The exponents ( τs,τd ) are closely clustered regardless of the thresholding parameter n . γ≈τs−1τd−1≈2 indicates operation near a critical point, well aligned with the universality class of mean-field directed percolation.
Figure 7: Critical transition in ResNets controlled by the BatchNorm scale parameter. (a) The order parameter ⟨S~z⟩ (see Eq. 9 ) as a function of log10γ for ResNet18, ResNet50, and ResNet152. Varying the BatchNorm affine scale γ drives a sharp change in network activity near γ=1 (vertical dashed line). (b) The corresponding susceptibility χγ=Δlog10γΔS~ˉz peaks near γ=1 , identifying the critical region. Remarkably, the susceptibility peak lies at the onset of the successful training range, while performance degrades for γ>1 and for sufficiently small γ [ 9 ] .
Figure 8: Mean-field Widom-like line and the edge of chaos. The edge of chaos marks parameters where the cross-input correlation depth diverges— with light and dark blue indicating the ordered and chaotic regions, respectively. In contrast, the Widom-like line locates the maximum σw -susceptibility where sensitivity to inputs is largest— the size of the dots encode the height of maximum susceptibility. The two curves meet only at the (σw2,σb2)=(1,0) . Importantly, all points on the edge of chaos correspond to the divergence of cross-input correlation depth. However, as σb2 grows, the susceptibility exhibits weaker peaks until the Widom-like line completely vanishes— well aligned with the learning performance (See Text).
Appendix figures & tables2 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 9: Training dynamics and initialization-dependent trainability on CIFAR-10. (a) Training loss and (b) training accuracy across 100 epochs for networks initialized with fixed bias variance σb2=10−4 and different weight variances σw2 , indicated by color. Only a restricted range of σw2 produces sustained optimization and increasing accuracy, whereas initialization outside this region leads to poor trainability. (c) Training accuracy after 10 epochs as a function of σw2 for different bias variances σb2 . Increasing σb2 shifts and progressively narrows the range of trainable weight variances.
Figure 10: Training accuracy for networks of increasing depth. Contour plots show the training accuracy obtained after 10 epochs on the MNIST dataset for fully connected deep neural networks with hidden dimension N=300 and depths of 200, 300, 400, and 500 layers. Each point corresponds to the average accuracy over 200 mini-batches (128 samples each) for a given initialization pair (σw,σb) . The color scale represents the achieved accuracy. The squared bias variance σb2 is shown on a logarithmic scale and σw2 on a linear scale.
John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA · Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel · Department of Physics, University of Toronto and Vector Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada
Department of Physics and Astronomy, Center for Materials Theory, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA · Center for Computational Quantum Physics, Flatiron Institute, New York, New York 10010, USA