Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41345128›Full record

ArticleNature communications2025

Sufficient is better than optimal for training neural networks.

Irina Babayan, Hazhir Aliahmadi, Greg van Anders

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Irina Babayan *Department of Physics, Engineering Physics, and Astronomy, Queen's University, Kingston ON, K7L 3N6, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3592-0451
Hazhir Aliahmadi *Department of Physics, Engineering Physics, and Astronomy, Queen's University, Kingston ON, K7L 3N6, Canada.
Greg van AndersDepartment of Physics, Engineering Physics, and Astronomy, Queen's University, Kingston ON, K7L 3N6, Canada. gva@queensu.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9746-2484

Funding

Gouvernement du Canada | Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Conseil de Recherches en Sciences Naturelles et en Génie du Canada) Canada Graduate ScholarshipGouvernement du Canada | Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Conseil de Recherches en Sciences Naturelles et en Génie du Canada) DGECR-2019-00469Gouvernement du Canada | Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Conseil de Recherches en Sciences Naturelles et en Génie du Canada) RGPIN-2019-05655Gouvernement du Canada | Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Conseil de Recherches en Sciences Naturelles et en Génie du Canada) Undergraduate Student Research Award
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The array of neural network training techniques that invoke optimization but rely on ad hoc modification for validity suggests that optimization-based training is misguided. Shortcomings of optimization-based training are brought to strong relief by overfitting, where naive optimization produces spurious outcomes. Here, we introduce simmering, a physics-based method that trains neural networks to generate "good enough" weights and biases, paradoxically outperforming leading optimization-based approaches. Instead of optimizing, simmering systematically samples non-optimal weights and biases to generate an ensemble that provides sufficient representations of the underlying phenomenon. Simmering corrects neural networks that are overfit by optimization, and produces more generalizable predictions if deployed from the outset compared to other overfitting mitigation methods. Our results question optimization as a paradigm for training transformers, and feedforward and convolutional neural networks. We leverage information-geometric arguments to point to the existence of classes of sufficient-training algorithms that do not take optimization as their starting point.

Identifiers

PMID41345128
PMCPMC12783652

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.