Task structure and nonlinearity jointly determine learned representational geometry
Matteo Alleman, Jack W. Lindsey, Stefano Fusi
Abstract
The utility of a learned neural representation depends on how well its geometry supports performance in downstream tasks. This geometry depends on the structure of the inputs, the structure of the target outputs, and the architecture of the network. By studying the learning dynamics of networks with one hidden layer, we discovered that the network's activation function has an unexpectedly strong impact on the representational geometry: Tanh networks tend to learn representations that reflect the structure of the target outputs, while ReLU networks retain more information about the structure of the raw inputs. This difference is consistently observed across a broad class of parameterized tasks in which we modulated the degree of alignment between the geometry of the task inputs and that of the task labels. We analyzed the learning dynamics in weight space and show how the differences between the networks with Tanh and ReLU nonlinearities arise from the asymmetric asymptotic behavior of ReLU, which leads feature neurons to specialize for different regions of input space. By contrast, feature neurons in Tanh networks tend to inherit the task label structure. Consequently, when the target outputs are low dimensional, Tanh networks generate neural representations that are more disentangled than those obtained with a ReLU nonlinearity. Our findings shed light on the interplay between input-output geometry, nonlinearity, and learned representations in neural networks.
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.
Cited by top-tier papers3
- Poisson Variational AutoencoderHadi Vafaii, Dekel Galor, Jacob L. YatesNeurIPS 2024 · 18 citations
- Feature segregation by signed weights in artificial vision systems and biological modelsGiordano Ramos-Traslosheros, Carlos PonceICLR 2026
- Disentangling Representations through Multi-task LearningPantelis Vafidis, Aman Bhargava, Antonio RangelICLR 2025
Builds on5
- A Geometric Analysis of Neural Collapse with Unconstrained FeaturesZhihui Zhu, Tianyu Ding, Jinxin Zhou, Xiao Li et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 303 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
- Neural Networks as Kernel Learners: The Silent Alignment EffectAlexander B. Atanasov, Blake Bordelon, Cengiz PehlevanICLR 2022 · 110 citations
- Generalized Neural Collapse for a Large Number of ClassesJiachen Jiang, Jinxin Zhou, Peng Wang, Qing Qu et al.ICML 2024 · 44 citations
- Improving VAEs' Robustness to Adversarial AttackMatthew Willetts, Alexander Camuto, Tom Rainforth, Stephen J. Roberts et al.ICLR 2021 · 30 citations
Related papers
- Make Haste Slowly: A Theory of Emergent Structured Mixed Selectivity in Feature Learning ReLU NetworksDevon Jarvis, Richard Klein, Benjamin Rosman, Andrew M. SaxeICLR 2025
- When Representations Align: Universality in Representation Learning DynamicsLoek van Rossem, Andrew M. SaxeICML 2024 · 8 citations
- Hidden Symmetries of ReLU NetworksJ. Elisenda Grigsby, Kathryn Lindsey, David RolnickICML 2023 · 35 citations
- Representation Learning Beyond Linear Prediction FunctionsZiping Xu, Ambuj TewariNeurIPS 2021 · 27 citations
- A Johnson-Lindenstrauss Framework for Randomly Initialized CNNsIdo Nachum, Jan Hazla, Michael Gastpar, Anatoly KhinaICLR 2022 · 5 citations
