Relative stability toward diffeomorphisms indicates performance in deep nets
Leonardo Petrini, Alessandro Favero, Mario Geiger, Matthieu Wyart
Abstract
Understanding why deep nets can classify data in large dimensions remains a challenge. It has been proposed that they do so by becoming stable to diffeomorphisms, yet existing empirical measurements support that it is often not the case. We revisit this question by defining a maximum-entropy distribution on diffeomorphisms, that allows to study typical diffeomorphisms of a given norm. We confirm that stability toward diffeomorphisms does not strongly correlate to performance on benchmark data sets of images. By contrast, we find that the stability toward diffeomorphisms relative to that of generic transformations R f correlates remarkably with the test error t . It is of order unity at initialization but decreases by several decades during training for state-of-the-art architectures. For CIFAR10 and 15 known architectures we find t ≈ 0.2 R f , suggesting that obtaining a small R f is important to achieve good performance. We study how R f depends on the size of the training set and compare it to a simple model of invariant learning. Recently, there has been a considerable effort to understand the benefits of learning features for onehidden-layer fully connected nets. Learning features can occur and improve performance when the 35th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2021).
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 52bbb3a7-9dfc-401f-8813-fdee0bbb726aCited by top-tier papers7
- Learning sparse features can lead to overfitting in neural networksLeonardo Petrini, Francesco Cagnetta, Eric Vanden-Eijnden, Matthieu WyartNeurIPS 2022 · 47 citations
- Automatic Data Augmentation via Invariance-Constrained LearningIgnacio Hounie, Luiz F. O. Chamon, Alejandro RibeiroICML 2023 · 20 citations
- What Can Be Learnt With Wide Convolutional Neural Networks?Francesco Cagnetta, Alessandro Favero, Matthieu WyartICML 2023 · 16 citations
- Synergy and Symmetry in Deep Learning: Interactions between the Data, Model, and Inference AlgorithmLechao Xiao, Jeffrey PenningtonICML 2022 · 12 citations
- Which Frequencies do CNNs Need? Emergent Bottleneck Structure in Feature LearningYuxiao Wen, Arthur JacotICML 2024 · 9 citations
Builds on3
- Finite Versus Infinite Neural Networks: an Empirical StudyJaehoon Lee, Samuel S. Schoenholz, Jeffrey Pennington, Ben Adlam et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 245 citations
- Classifying high-dimensional Gaussian mixtures: Where kernel methods fail and neural networks succeedMaria Refinetti, Sebastian Goldt, Florent Krzakala, Lenka ZdeborováICML 2021 · 83 citations
- On Translation Invariance in CNNs: Convolutional Layers Can Exploit Absolute Spatial LocationOsman Semih Kayhan, Jan C. van GemertCVPR 2020
Related papers
- In What Ways Are Deep Neural Networks Invariant and How Should We Measure This?Henry Kvinge, Tegan Emerson, Grayson Jorgenson, Scott Vasquez et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 15 citations
- How Deep Networks Learn Sparse and Hierarchical Data: the Sparse Random Hierarchy ModelUmberto M. Tomasini, Matthieu WyartICML 2024 · 7 citations
- On the geometry of generalization and memorization in deep neural networksCory Stephenson, Suchismita Padhy, Abhinav Ganesh, Yue Hui et al.ICLR 2021 · 95 citations
- Deep learning versus kernel learning: an empirical study of loss landscape geometry and the time evolution of the Neural Tangent KernelStanislav Fort, Gintare Karolina Dziugaite, Mansheej Paul, Sepideh Kharaghani et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 255 citations
- Asymptotics of Learning with Deep Structured (Random) FeaturesDominik Schröder, Daniil Dmitriev, Hugo Cui, Bruno LoureiroICML 2024 · 12 citations
