Improved Bounds on Neural Complexity for Representing Piecewise Linear Functions
Kuan-Lin Chen, Harinath Garudadri, Bhaskar D. Rao
Abstract
A deep neural network using rectified linear units represents a continuous piecewise linear (CPWL) function and vice versa. Recent results in the literature estimated that the number of neurons needed to exactly represent any CPWL function grows exponentially with the number of pieces or exponentially in terms of the factorial of the number of distinct linear components. Moreover, such growth is amplified linearly with the input dimension. These existing results seem to indicate that the cost of representing a CPWL function is expensive. In this paper, we propose much tighter bounds and establish a polynomial time algorithm to find a network satisfying these bounds for any given CPWL function. We prove that the number of hidden neurons required to exactly represent any CPWL function is at most a quadratic function of the number of pieces. In contrast to all previous results, this upper bound is invariant to the input dimension. Besides the number of pieces, we also study the number of distinct linear components in CPWL functions. When such a number is also given, we prove that the quadratic complexity turns into bilinear, which implies a lower neural complexity because the number of distinct linear components is always not greater than the minimum number of pieces in a CPWL function. When the number of pieces is unknown, we prove that, in terms of the number of distinct linear components, the neural complexities of any CPWL function are at most polynomial growth for low-dimensional inputs and factorial growth for the worst-case scenario, which are significantly better than existing results in the literature.
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 5c6df398-34b2-45e1-a462-33c6688fc06aCited by top-tier papers8
- Towards Lower Bounds on the Depth of ReLU Neural NetworksChristoph Hertrich, Amitabh Basu, Marco Di Summa, Martin SkutellaNeurIPS 2021 · 70 citations
- Don't trust your eyes: on the (un)reliability of feature visualizationsRobert Geirhos, Roland S. Zimmermann, Blair L. Bilodeau, Wieland Brendel et al.ICML 2024 · 38 citations
- Model Reconstruction Using Counterfactual Explanations: A Perspective From Polytope TheoryPasan Dissanayake, Sanghamitra DuttaNeurIPS 2024 · 17 citations
- Better Neural Network Expressivity: Subdividing the SimplexEgor Bakaev, Florestan Brunck, Christoph Hertrich, Jack Stade et al.STOC 2026 · 16 citations
- The Computational Complexity of Counting Linear Regions in ReLU Neural NetworksMoritz Stargalla, Christoph Hertrich, Daniel ReichmanNeurIPS 2025 · 11 citations
Builds on3
- Reverse-engineering deep ReLU networksDavid Rolnick, Konrad P. KordingICML 2020 · 121 citations
- Towards Lower Bounds on the Depth of ReLU Neural NetworksChristoph Hertrich, Amitabh Basu, Marco Di Summa, Martin SkutellaNeurIPS 2021 · 70 citations
- ResNEsts and DenseNEsts: Block-based DNN Models with Improved Representation GuaranteesKuan-Lin Chen, Ching Hua Lee, Harinath Garudadri, Bhaskar D. RaoNeurIPS 2021 · 9 citations
Related papers
- Depth-Bounds for Neural Networks via the Braid ArrangementMoritz Grillo, Christoph Hertrich, Georg LohoNeurIPS 2025 · 15 citations
- Decomposition Polyhedra of Piecewise Linear FunctionsMarie-Charlotte Brandenburg, Moritz Leo Grillo, Christoph HertrichICLR 2025
- How Many Neurons Does it Take to Approximate the Maximum?Itay Safran, Daniel Reichman, Paul ValiantSODA 2024 · 3 citations
- Piecewise linear activations substantially shape the loss surfaces of neural networksFengxiang He, Bohan Wang, Dacheng TaoICLR 2020 · 33 citations
- Measuring Model Complexity of Neural Networks with Curve Activation FunctionsXia Hu, Weiqing Liu, Jiang Bian, Jian PeiKDD 2020 · 25 citations
