cs.LGOct 14, 2026
SaveTrainable at Depth, Solvable at Small Size: What the Loss Surface of a Polynomial Activation Dictates for Designing, Initializing and Training Networks
Abstract
What makes a deep network train, and what shape is its loss surface? We answer both with one construction at two scales: a polynomial activation f (z) = z + λz 3 , clamped and projected onto the unit sphere, plus an unnormalized identity path. As a deep stack it trains to one hundred layers on MNIST with no normalization machinery; as a small model its square loss is a polynomial system we solve exactly. The small scale explains the large one: it prescribes how to design, initialize and train the stack.
Figures & tables
| Activation | Params | Train acc. | Test acc. | Test loss | s/epoch |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GELU | 233,866 | 99.88 | 98.20 | 0.0851 | 2.5 |
| SiLU | 233,866 | 99.70 | 98.13 | 0.0814 | 2.3 |
| ReLU | 233,866 | 99.90 | 98.07 | 0.0908 | 6.5 |
| Tanh | 233,866 | 99.74 | 97.79 | 0.0803 | 1.6 |
| Poly + proj. | 233,866 | 96.98 | 95.93 | 0.1374 | 4.7 |
| Poly | 233,866 | 95.36 | 94.34 | 0.2042 | 2.7 |
Table 1: Activations on MNIST at depth 10 (128 hidden units, AdamW, 10 epochs, seed 42, CPU, no normalization; gated variants use hidden width 82 for parameter parity).
| Activation | Norm | Pos | Test acc. (%) | Worst-layer grad. ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ReLU | None | post | 98.07 | 3.5853 |
| ReLU | BatchNorm | post | 98.19 | 6.5187 |
| ReLU | LayerNorm | post | 98.11 | 3.5213 |
| ReLU | RMSNorm | post | 98.03 | 2.3955 |
| ReLU | LayerNorm | pre | 98.11 | 3.5213 |
| ReLU | RMSNorm | pre | 98.03 | 2.3955 |
Table 2: Normalization schemes on MNIST at depth 10, with ReLU and with the polynomial activation . Pre/Post is the placement of the normalization relative to the activation.
| Configuration | 2 | 3 | 5 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 30 | 50 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ReLU | 97.61 | 98.03 | 98.24 | 98.07 | 97.83 | 97.65 | 94.39 | 11.35 |
| ReLU+BN | – | – | – | – | – | – | 97.39 | 44.64 |
| ReLU+LN | – | – | – | – | – | – | 12.95 | 11.35 |
| Poly | 92.81 | 94.04 | 95.09 | 94.34 | 92.96 | 92.88 | 10.28 | 10.28 |
| Poly+ | 92.68 | 94.45 | 95.21 | 95.93 | 95.62 | 95.43 | 94.10 | 11.35 |
| Poly+LN | 93.54 | 94.91 | 96.32 | 96.29 | 95.94 | 96.11 | 95.38 | 11.35 |
Table 3: Depth scaling: test accuracy (%) as a function of the number of linear layers (MNIST, 128 hidden units, 10 epochs, seed 42). come from a separate group of runs.
| Configuration | Test acc. (%) | Pred. classes |
|---|---|---|
| None / xavier | 10.99 1.55 | 2 |
| None / identity | 31.38 11.01 | 10 |
| Residual / xavier | 94.50 0.86 | 10 |
| Residual / identity | 93.66 1.10 | 10 |
Table 4: Identity residual connections without any normalization (MNIST, polynomial activation , , 128 hidden units, 10 epochs). Entry is test accuracy (%) as mean standard deviation over 4 seeds; the last column is the number of predicted classes. The residual uses no projection and no normalization of any kind: ( norm=none ).
| Configuration | 10 | 50 | 200 | 300 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poly (no residual) | 94.49 | 10.82 | 10.60 | 9.80 |
| Poly + residual | 97.11 | 93.97 | 94.81 | 93.80 |
Table 5: Depth scaling with the identity residual, no normalization (MNIST, polynomial activation, xavier init, 2 seeds). The plain polynomial column is at chance from onward, either as a constant predictor or as an uninformative scatter over the classes; the residual column stays near its value out to . This collapsed column is not comparable across tables to the last digit (Section 6.5 ).
| Configuration | depth | , | vars | ||
| Plain, | 2 | 5 | |||
| Plain, | 2 | 5 | |||
| Plain, | 4 | — | |||
| Plain, | 3 | — | |||
| Plain, | 2 | — | |||
| Plain, | 4 | — |
Table 6: Critical-point ideal of the untruncated polynomial network under the square loss, with . is the number of hidden units, the number of training samples, and the degree of the ideal (stationary points counted over ), reported only when . Every row is a small model — at most two hidden layers, at most three samples, at most seven variables — because the Grobner computation, not the architecture, sets the ceiling. A positive dimension means the stationary set is not a finite collection of points.
| Configuration | depth | dim | deg | loss | const | zero eig. | n | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plain | 1 | 2 | ||||||
| 1 | 1 | |||||||
| 1 | 1 | |||||||
| 1 | 1 | |||||||
| Plain | 1 | 3 | ||||||
| 1 | 2 |
Table 7: Numerical irreducible decomposition of the critical ideal by Bertini v1.6 for the small models of Table 6 . Each row is one irreducible component of the critical set of the loss (all rows grouped by identical invariants, the multiplicity in the ‘n’ column): its dimension, its degree (the number of witness points, i.e. the number of points a generic linear slice meets it in), the value of the loss on it, whether that loss is constant, and the number of zero eigenvalues of the loss Hessian at a generic point of it, taken over the trainable parameters only. ‘ ’ in the ‘const’ column means the loss is constant on the component: the spread over its witness points is at double-precision round-off (Hypothesis H2 of Yang (2021) ); the ‘zero eig.’ column then tests Hypothesis H3: it must reproduce the ‘dim’ column. Both hypotheses hold on every one of the 26 genuine components. Components lying in the cleared denominator , where the loss is undefined, are artifacts of clearing the denominator and are excluded. The largest model here uses trainable parameters and the slowest decomposition took s, well inside the budget of Sec. 4 .
More in this topic
Neural Network Optimization
Neural network optimization studies algorithms and training dynamics that help models learn efficiently, reliably, and generalize well.
See all 332 papersMotivated by theoretical problems in deep learning, we conjecture that post-composing a fixed number of pairwise distinct nonconstant polynomials with a generic polynomial of sufficiently large degree yields linearly independent polynomials. This generalizes Newman--Slater's theorem on powers of polynomials. We establish several cases of this conjecture and its origin-passing variant: We prove the result for two polynomials, and for an arbitrary number of polynomials when their degrees are bounded. Furthermore, we show how the conjecture implies a complete understanding of the identifiability (i.e., parameter symmetries) of deep fully connected neural network architectures with generic polynomial activation functions. In particular, for network architectures with layer-specific activations of increasing degree, our established versions of the conjecture fully characterize the set of parameters yielding the same end-to-end network function. As a special case, we fully resolve the identifiability of shallow polynomial networks.
Beyond Overparameterization: Provable Learning of Input-Convex Multi-Layer Polynomial Networks with Active Queries
The theoretical understanding of multi-layer neural networks is largely confined to overparameterized settings, which obscure parameter identifiability and incur high sample complexity. Neural tangent kernel (NTK) provides a general theory for wide networks, but does not offer efficient sample-complexity guarantees. Recent feature-learning results go beyond kernel methods for single-neuron, multi-index, and hierarchical targets. However, the analysis is often restricted to shallow or specific architectures and to the overparameterized regime. We break this paradigm to achieve parameter-level recovery of deep target networks, albeit by using active data queries. Specifically, we study -layer polynomial networks with even degree- monomial activations and nonnegative higher-layer weights. This structure makes the target network input-convex, while the optimization landscape remains highly nonconvex with respect to the parameters. Leveraging input convexity and active queries, we propose ASPIRE (Active SamPling for Iterative Recovery via Eigendirections), a layerwise sampling-based diagonalization algorithm that recovers all network parameters to -accuracy with sample complexity in polynomial time. To our knowledge, this is the first parameter-recovery guarantee for deep target networks whose exponent grows only polynomially with depth, as well as the first justification for the effectiveness of using high-quality data in neural network training, with a remarkably exponential separation.
A Theory of Saddle Escape in Deep Nonlinear Networks
In deep networks with small initialization, training exhibits long plateaus separated by sharp feature-acquisition transitions. Whereas shallow nonlinear networks and deep linear networks are well studied, extending these analyses to deep nonlinear networks remains challenging. We derive an exact identity for the imbalance of Frobenius norms of layer weight matrices that holds for any smooth activation and any differentiable loss and use this to classify activation functions into four universality classes. On the permutation-symmetric submanifold, the identity combines with an approximate balance law to reduce the full matrix flow to a scalar ODE, giving a critical-depth escape time law governed by the number of layers at the bottleneck scale rather than the total depth . We find that this same exponent is recovered under He-normal initialization with bottleneck layers rescaled by , where the symmetry manifold is preserved by the flow but not attracting. We find close agreement between our theory and numerical simulations.