Why ReLU? A Bit-Model Dichotomy for Deep Network Training
Abstract
Domain fit: Niche / domain-specific · No strong AI-core implementation/artifact signals were detected from current providers.
Theoretical analyses of Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM) are standardly framed within the Real-RAM model of computation. In this setting, training even simple neural networks is known to be $\exists \mathbb{R}$-complete -- a complexity class believed to be harder than NP, that characterizes the difficulty of solving systems of polynomial inequalities over the real numbers. However, this algebraic framework diverges from the reality of digital computation with finite-precision hardware. In this work, we analyze the theoretical complexity of ERM under a realistic bit-level model ($\mathsf{ERM}_{\text{bit}}$), where network parameters and inputs are constrained to be rational numbers with polynomially bounded bit-lengths. Under this model, we reveal a sharp dichotomy in tractability governed by the network's activation function. We prove that for deep networks with {\em any} polynomial activations with rational coefficients and degree at least $2$, the bit-complexity of training is severe: deciding $\mathsf{ERM}_{\text{bit}}$ is $\#P$-Hard, hence believed to be strictly harder than NP-complete problems. Furthermore, we show that determining the sign of a single partial derivative of the empirical loss function is intractable (unlikely in BPP), and deciding a specific bit in the gradient is $\#P$-Hard. This provides a complexity-theoretic perspective for the phenomenon of exploding and vanishing gradients. In contrast, we show that for piecewise-linear activations such as ReLU, the precision requirements remain manageable: $\mathsf{ERM}_{\text{bit}}$ is contained within NP (specifically NP-complete), and standard backpropagation runs in polynomial time. Our results demonstrate that finite-precision constraints are not merely implementation details but fundamental determinants of learnability.
Results and benchmarks
Theoretical analyses of Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM) are standardly framed within the Real-RAM model of computation.
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.
- MachineLearning-Nerd/icml26-relu-bit-model-dichotomy
Confidence: Medium · 0 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.
Models
Datasets
Spaces
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPX