Anatomy of Capability Emergence: Scale-Invariant Representation Collapse and Top-Down Reorganization in Neural Networks
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Capability emergence during neural network training remains mechanistically opaque. We track five geometric measures across five model scales (405K--85M parameters), 120 task$\times$level$\times$ model combinations (119 achieving accuracy-based emergence) across eight algorithmic tasks, and three Pythia language models (160M--2.8B). We find: (1) training begins with a universal representation collapse to task-specific floors that are scale-invariant across a 210$\times$ parameter range (e.g., modular arithmetic collapses to RANKME $\,\approx\,$2.0 regardless of model size); (2) collapse propagates top-down through layers (28/32 task$ \times $model consistency), contradicting bottom-up feature-building intuition; (3) a geometric hierarchy in which representation geometry leads emergence (100% precursor rate for hard tasks across all model sizes), while the local learning coefficient is synchronous (0/24 precursor) and Hessian measures lag. We also delineate prediction limits: geometric measures encode coarse task difficulty but not fine-grained timing (within-class concordance ranges from 52% for easy tasks to 69% for hard tasks; when task ordering reverses across scales, prediction fails at 26%). On Pythia, global geometric patterns replicate but per-task precursor signals do not, as the precursor relationship requires task--training alignment that naturalistic pre-training does not provide. Our contribution is the geometric anatomy of emergence and its boundary conditions, not a prediction tool.
Results and benchmarks
Capability emergence during neural network training remains mechanistically opaque.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Repositories and ecosystem
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
- jb1999/capability-acquisition-paper
Confidence: Low · 1 stars
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Datasets
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
None detected
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Natural Language Processing
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.