arXiv:2608.13156v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Pre-norm is the standard normalization placement in modern Transformers because it facilitates joint optimization of full-depth models. We ask whether this preference persists when depth is introduced through a curriculum. In curriculum depth growth, each appended block receives the boundary representation produced by a trained prefix, making normalization placement relevant to forward conditioning. We therefore test whether placement and training curriculum interact. In a controlled distillation study with a Qwen3-8B teacher and a nine-layer student, pre-norm and post-norm are indistinguishable under joint training, differing by $0.0004$ validation CE, while post-norm improves over pre-norm by $0.0328$ under curriculum growth, an order of magnitude larger. A post-joint control matched by student active-layer tokens remains worse than post-grow, which rules out compute as the sole explanation. The ranking crosses over during the curriculum: post-norm takes the lead once blocks are appended. Single-block and freeze controls localize the ranking change to block appending rather than shallow-block quality or retraining. Boundary diagnostics associate post-norm with stable residual scales and pre-norm with structural-token scale drift; on a fixed batch, the final pre-grow block is also nearly identity-mapped. Together with the phase-wise crossover, these observations are consistent with boundary-scale conditioning after new blocks are appended. The results motivate treating normalization placement and training curriculum as coupled design choices in this distillation setting.
Abstract: Pre-norm is the standard normalization placement in modern Transformers because it facilitates joint optimization of full-depth models. We ask whether this preference persists when depth is introduced through a curriculum. In curriculum depth growth, each appended block receives the boundary representation produced by a trained prefix, making normalization placement relevant to forward conditioning. We therefore test whether placement and training curriculum interact. In a controlled distillation study with a Qwen3-8B teacher and a nine-layer student, pre-norm and post-norm are indistinguishable under joint training, differing by $0.0004$ validation CE, while post-norm improves over pre-norm by $0.0328$ under curriculum growth, an order of magnitude larger. A post-joint control matched by student active-layer tokens remains worse than post-grow, which rules out compute as the sole explanation. The ranking crosses over during the curriculum: post-norm takes the lead once blocks are appended. Single-block and freeze controls localize the ranking change to block appending rather than shallow-block quality or retraining. Boundary diagnostics associate post-norm with stable residual scales and pre-norm with structural-token scale drift; on a fixed batch, the final pre-grow block is also nearly identity-mapped. Together with the phase-wise crossover, these observations are consistent with boundary-scale conditioning after new blocks are appended. The results motivate treating normalization placement and training curriculum as coupled design choices in this distillation setting.
This article has been indexed from cs.AI updates on arXiv.org
Read the original article: