ArticlePhysical review. E2026
Data coarse graining can improve model performance.
Article in Physical review. E, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lossy data transformations by definition lose information. Yet, in modern machine learning, methods like data pruning and lossy data augmentation can help improve generalization performance. We study this paradox using a solvable model of high-dimensional, ridge-regularized linear regression under data coarse graining. Conceptually inspired by the renormalization group in statistical physics, we analyze coarse-graining schemes that systematically discard features based on their relevance to the learning task. Our results reveal a nonmonotonic dependence of the prediction risk on the degree of coarse graining. A high-pass scheme-which filters out less relevant, lower-signal features-can help models generalize better. By contrast, a low-pass scheme that integrates out more relevant, higher-signal features is purely detrimental. Crucially, using optimal regularization, we demonstrate that this nonmonotonicity is a distinct effect of data coarse graining and not an artifact of double descent. Our framework offers a clear, analytical explanation for why careful data augmentation works: it strips away less relevant degrees of freedom and isolates more predictive signals. Our results highlight a complex, nonmonotonic risk landscape shaped by the structure of the data and illustrate how ideas from statistical physics provide a principled lens for understanding modern machine learning phenomena.
Identifiers
41857918What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.