Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41857918›Full record

ArticlePhysical review. E2026

Data coarse graining can improve model performance.

Alex Nguyen, David J Schwab, Vudtiwat Ngampruetikorn

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alex NguyenPrinceton University, Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton, New Jersey 08540, USA.
David J SchwabThe Graduate Center, CUNY, Initiative for the Theoretical Sciences, New York, New York 10016, USA.
Vudtiwat NgampruetikornUniversity of Sydney, School of Physics, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

PMID41857918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.