arXiv:2608.14636v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Fractional optimization methods and fractal activation functions are two independent directions for improving neural network training. Fractional optimizers extend first-order optimization through fractional derivatives and memory effects, whereas fractal activations introduce multi-scale nonlinear representations based on self-similar Weierstrass- and Blancmange-type functions. Here, we investigate their interaction within a unified experimental framework. We evaluate fractional optimizer families on Ackley and Himmelblau benchmark surfaces, in standard form and with additive Weierstrass-type perturbations, and then in feed-forward neural networks with conventional and fractal activations on ten classification datasets. The comparison includes standard methods, regularization-style optimizers, explicit and adaptive memory-based fractional optimizers, and other representative literature methods. Overall, fractional optimization and fractal activations show useful but selective pairings. Regularization-style fractional scaling performs well with selected fractal activations in network training, while Gr\"unwald–Letnikov memory is most relevant on perturbed surfaces. Adaptive memory improves plain memory substitution in several cases, supporting controlled fractional memory as a promising direction rather than a universal replacement.
Abstract: Fractional optimization methods and fractal activation functions are two independent directions for improving neural network training. Fractional optimizers extend first-order optimization through fractional derivatives and memory effects, whereas fractal activations introduce multi-scale nonlinear representations based on self-similar Weierstrass- and Blancmange-type functions. Here, we investigate their interaction within a unified experimental framework. We evaluate fractional optimizer families on Ackley and Himmelblau benchmark surfaces, in standard form and with additive Weierstrass-type perturbations, and then in feed-forward neural networks with conventional and fractal activations on ten classification datasets. The comparison includes standard methods, regularization-style optimizers, explicit and adaptive memory-based fractional optimizers, and other representative literature methods. Overall, fractional optimization and fractal activations show useful but selective pairings. Regularization-style fractional scaling performs well with selected fractal activations in network training, while Gr\"unwald–Letnikov memory is most relevant on perturbed surfaces. Adaptive memory improves plain memory substitution in several cases, supporting controlled fractional memory as a promising direction rather than a universal replacement.
This article has been indexed from cs.AI updates on arXiv.org
Read the original article: