Leo Gagnon

Sarthak Mittal, Leo Gagnon, Guillaume Lajoie

Frontier models have demonstrated exceptional capabilities following the integration of task-reward-based reinforcement learning (RL) into their training pipelines, enabling systems to evolve from pure reasoning models into sophisticated agents. However, debate persists regarding whether RL genuinely instills new skills within a base model or merely sharpens its existing distribution to elicit latent capabilities. To address this dichotomy, we present an explicit comparison between distribution sharpening and task-reward-based learning, utilizing RL as a tool to implement both paradigms. Our analysis reveals the inherent limitations of distribution sharpening, demonstrating from first principles how and why the optima can be unfavorable and the approach fundamentally unstable. Furthermore, our experiments using Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct, Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct and Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 on math datasets confirm that sharpening yields limited gains, whereas incorporating task-based reward signal can greatly help achieve robust performance improvements and stable learning.

Tom Marty, Eric Elmoznino, Leo Gagnon et al.

Deep neural networks exhibit a simplicity bias, a well-documented tendency to favor simple functions over complex ones. In this work, we cast new light on this phenomenon through the lens of the Minimum Description Length principle, formalizing supervised learning as a problem of optimal two-part lossless compression. Our theory explains how simplicity bias governs feature selection in neural networks through a fundamental trade-off between model complexity (the cost of describing the hypothesis) and predictive power (the cost of describing the data). Our framework predicts that as the amount of available training data increases, learners transition through qualitatively different features -- from simple spurious shortcuts to complex features -- only when the reduction in data encoding cost justifies the increased model complexity. Consequently, we identify distinct data regimes where increasing data promotes robustness by ruling out trivial shortcuts, and conversely, regimes where limiting data can act as a form of complexity-based regularization, preventing the learning of unreliable complex environmental cues. We validate our theory on a semi-synthetic benchmark showing that the feature selection of neural networks follows the same trajectory of solutions as optimal two-part compressors.

Eric Elmoznino, Tom Marty, Tejas Kasetty et al.

A central goal of machine learning is generalization. While the No Free Lunch Theorem states that we cannot obtain theoretical guarantees for generalization without further assumptions, in practice we observe that simple models which explain the training data generalize best: a principle called Occam's razor. Despite the need for simple models, most current approaches in machine learning only minimize the training error, and at best indirectly promote simplicity through regularization or architecture design. Here, we draw a connection between Occam's razor and in-context learning: an emergent ability of certain sequence models like Transformers to learn at inference time from past observations in a sequence. In particular, we show that the next-token prediction loss used to train in-context learners is directly equivalent to a data compression technique called prequential coding, and that minimizing this loss amounts to jointly minimizing both the training error and the complexity of the model that was implicitly learned from context. Our theory and the empirical experiments we use to support it not only provide a normative account of in-context learning, but also elucidate the shortcomings of current in-context learning methods, suggesting ways in which they can be improved. We make our code available at https://github.com/3rdCore/PrequentialCode.

Leo Gagnon, Eric Elmoznino, Sarthak Mittal et al.

The rapid adaptation ability of auto-regressive foundation models is often attributed to the diversity of their pre-training data. This is because, from a Bayesian standpoint, minimizing prediction error in such settings requires integrating over all plausible latent hypotheses consistent with observations. While this behavior is desirable in principle, it often proves too ambitious in practice: under high ambiguity, the number of plausible latent alternatives makes Bayes-optimal prediction computationally intractable. Cognitive science has long recognized this limitation, suggesting that under such conditions, heuristics or information-seeking strategies are preferable to exhaustive inference. Translating this insight to next-token prediction, we hypothesize that low- and high-ambiguity predictions pose different computational demands, making ambiguity-agnostic next-token prediction a detrimental inductive bias. To test this, we introduce MetaHMM, a synthetic sequence meta-learning benchmark with rich compositional structure and a tractable Bayesian oracle. We show that Transformers indeed struggle with high-ambiguity predictions across model sizes. Motivated by cognitive theories, we propose a method to convert pre-trained models into Monte Carlo predictors that decouple task inference from token prediction. Preliminary results show substantial gains in ambiguous contexts through improved capacity allocation and test-time scalable inference, though challenges remain.