Before we can read a single line of the parent note, we need to make sure no word on this page is a mystery. Below, every symbol and term the parent uses is unpacked from zero: plain meaning → the picture it draws → why the topic needs it.
Everything logged comes out of a loop that repeats. If you have never seen one, here is the whole idea in a picture.
Look at the figure. The circle is one turn of the loop. Every turn spits out at least one number — the loss. That stream of numbers, turn after turn, is exactly what we want to record. Without the loop there is nothing to log; the loop is the source of all data.
Every logged number needs an answer to "when did this happen?". Two words answer that.
In the figure, the long horizontal line is step — it never resets. Epochs are the coloured brackets grouping equal chunks of steps. The parent note computes:
Let's read that in plain words, because it is the single most important arithmetic on the parent page.
WHY multiply? Because b alone restarts at 0 every epoch. If we plotted against b, epoch 2's points would land on top of epoch 1's points — the graph would be a scribble. Multiplying e×B pushes each epoch's block of steps to a fresh, higher region of the x-axis so nothing overlaps. WHAT it looks like: a straight, always-increasing timeline (the flat line in the figure), never a loop-back.
A model does not hold one weight; a single layer holds thousands. To watch them all at once we need a picture of a whole collection of numbers.
Look at the figure: the same 5,000 weight values, drawn as a histogram. WHY the topic needs this: a single scalar can't tell you if a layer's weights are all collapsing to zero (dead neurons) or blowing up. The shape of the bag tells you. This is the direct link to vanishing / exploding gradients — a histogram of gradients that shrinks toward a spike at zero is what "vanishing" looks like.
We have numbers and we have timestamps. Now: how do they leave the running program?
The figure shows the flow: loop → writer → event file → (later) the viewer draws the plot. Two crucial properties, both visible as one-way arrows:
Append-only: new records are only ever added to the end, never rewritten. WHY? If training crashes at step 5000, everything up to 5000 is already safely on disk — nothing is lost. That is the "crash-safe" claim in the parent note.
Decoupled: the viewer reads the file independently of the training program. WHY? You can open the plots while training still runs, or days after it finished, from a different terminal.
This is the bridge to model versioning: an artifact (a checkpoint) plus its provenance (the exact run that made it) is a versioned model you can trust and retrieve.
Read it top to bottom: the loop makes numbers, we tag them with when and what, a writer files them, and a viewer turns the file back into pictures. Add the categories and provenance, and you have full experiment tracking — the parent topic.