Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Source content · Analysis pending2 min read

Rank Measures of Fine-Tuning Updates Need a Noise Baseline

Summary

arXiv:2610.22438v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Studies of what fine-tuning does to a language model often summarise the weight update $\Delta W$ by its rank. We compare the rank measures used for this against the same measures on a random matrix of the same shape, and against two harder references: the pretrained weights, and matched fine-tunes without alignment content. Measures that count directions put our fine-tuning updates only a little below noise; stable rank, computed from the same singular values, puts them far below. Both are right: an update has a few strong directions on top of a long tail. The pattern holds for thirteen released pairs up to 8B parameters, and it is not a mark of alignment: with training held fixed, instruction data does not stand out from Wikipedia or code,…

SourcearXiv Machine LearningAuthor: Muhammad Usman Altaf
Rank Measures of Fine-Tuning Updates Need a Noise Baseline
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 15 Oct 2026]

Title:Rank Measures of Fine-Tuning Updates Need a Noise Baseline

View a PDF of the paper titled Rank Measures of Fine-Tuning Updates Need a Noise Baseline, by Muhammad Usman Altaf

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Studies of what fine-tuning does to a language model often summarise the weight update $\Delta W$ by its rank. We compare the rank measures used for this against the same measures on a random matrix of the same shape, and against two harder references: the pretrained weights, and matched fine-tunes without alignment content. Measures that count directions put our fine-tuning updates only a little below noise; stable rank, computed from the same singular values, puts them far below. Both are right: an update has a few strong directions on top of a long tail. The pattern holds for thirteen released pairs up to 8B parameters, and it is not a mark of alignment: with training held fixed, instruction data does not stand out from Wikipedia or code, DPO gives the same update whether its preference labels are real or half swapped at random (one model, modest preference strength), and scrambled text gives the most concentrated update of all. Applied to a recent claim that post-training is superficial because the effective rank of the weights barely changes, the baselines show that a random update of the same size leaves that rank almost unchanged while wrecking the model, and that an edit built on the effective rank of the update has no measurable effect in our tests. Rank measures of weight updates need a noise baseline, and claims about alignment need a control without alignment content.

Comments: 24 pages, 6 figures, 15 tables. Under review at TMLR

Subjects:

Machine Learning (cs.LG)

ACM classes: I.2.6; I.2.7

Cite as: arXiv:2610.22438 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2610.22438v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.22438

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Muhammad Usman Altaf [view email] [v1] Thu, 15 Oct 2026 13:52:20 UTC (170 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Rank Measures of Fine-Tuning Updates Need a Noise Baseline, by Muhammad Usman Altaf

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Additional Features

Audio Summary

Current browse context:

cs.LG

new | recent | 2026-10

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

IArxiv recommender toggle

IArxiv Recommender (What is IArxiv?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • AI generation is temporarily unavailable; this entry was preserved with deterministic fallback metadata.
  • arXiv:2610.22438v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Studies of what fine-tuning does to a language model often summarise the weight update $\Delta W$ by its rank. We compare the rank…

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.