Why exactly one factor starts at zero
ProofIntermediate⏱ 30 minFine-Tuninginitialisationgradientstationary point
Problem
For :
- Derive and in terms of .
- Show is a stationary point of the adapter parameters, and that it is not a local minimum in general.
- Show that with random is not stationary, and that the first update makes both gradients non-zero.
Write a complete argument. Every inequality you use should be one you could state precisely.
Solution
Opening this before you have a real attempt on paper is the fastest way to feel like you understand something you cannot reproduce.
Related problems
All problems| Solved | Problem | Field | Type | Difficulty | Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adapter parameter counts | Fine-Tuning | Numerical | 15 min | ||
| The cross-entropy gradient is the prediction error | LLMs | Proof | 15 min | ||
| Gradient magnitude through a deep chain | Deep Learning | Proof | 30 min | ||
| Non-convex gradient descent reaches an approximate stationary point | Optimization | Proof | 30 min | ||
| The softmax Jacobian as a variance, and saturation | Deep Learning | Proof | 30 min |