Do More Negative Samples Necessarily Hurt In Contrastive Learning?
Pranjal Awasthi, Nishanth Dikkala, Pritish Kamath
Abstract
Recent investigations in noise contrastive estimation suggest, both empirically as well as theoretically, that while having more "negative samples" in the contrastive loss improves downstream classification performance initially, beyond a threshold, it hurts downstream performance due to a "collision-coverage" trade-off. But is such a phenomenon inherent in contrastive learning? We show in a simple theoretical setting, where positive pairs are generated by sampling from the underlying latent class (introduced by Saunshi et al. (ICML 2019)), that the downstream performance of the representation optimizing the (population) contrastive loss in fact does not degrade with the number of negative samples. Along the way, we give a structural characterization of the optimal representation in our framework, for noise contrastive estimation. We also provide empirical support for our theoretical results on CIFAR-10 and CIFAR-100 datasets.
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 ee025f58-39ab-4336-9f73-01f1ed37a715Cited by top-tier papers14
- Improving Self-Supervised Learning by Characterizing Idealized RepresentationsYann Dubois, Stefano Ermon, Tatsunori B. Hashimoto, Percy LiangNeurIPS 2022 · 50 citations
- Self-Supervised Contrastive Learning is Approximately Supervised Contrastive LearningAchleshwar Luthra, Tianbao Yang, Tomer GalantiNeurIPS 2025 · 7 citations
- Headless Language Models: Learning without Predicting with Contrastive Weight TyingNathan Godey, Éric Villemonte de la Clergerie, Benoît SagotICLR 2024 · 5 citations
- Embedding Dimension of Contrastive Learning and k-Nearest NeighborsDmitrii Avdiukhin, Vaggos Chatziafratis, Orr Fischer, Grigory YaroslavtsevNeurIPS 2024 · 5 citations
- On the Alignment Between Supervised and Self-Supervised Contrastive LearningAchleshwar Luthra, Priyadarsi Mishra, Tomer GalantiICLR 2026 · 4 citations
Builds on11
- A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual RepresentationsTing Chen, Simon Kornblith, Mohammad Norouzi, Geoffrey E. HintonICML 2020 · 24,064 citations
- Bootstrap Your Own Latent - A New Approach to Self-Supervised LearningJean-Bastien Grill, Florian Strub, Florent Altché, Corentin Tallec et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 9,171 citations
- Understanding Contrastive Representation Learning through Alignment and Uniformity on the HypersphereTongzhou Wang, Phillip IsolaICML 2020 · 2,360 citations
- Provable Guarantees for Self-Supervised Deep Learning with Spectral Contrastive LossJeff Z. HaoChen, Colin Wei, Adrien Gaidon, Tengyu MaNeurIPS 2021 · 425 citations
- Self-Supervised Learning with Data Augmentations Provably Isolates Content from StyleJulius von Kügelgen, Yash Sharma, Luigi Gresele, Wieland Brendel et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 421 citations
Related papers
- On the Surrogate Gap between Contrastive and Supervised LossesHan Bao, Yoshihiro Nagano, Kento NozawaICML 2022 · 27 citations
- Understanding Contrastive Learning Requires Incorporating Inductive BiasesNikunj Saunshi, Jordan T. Ash, Surbhi Goel, Dipendra Misra et al.ICML 2022 · 130 citations
- A theoretical study of inductive biases in contrastive learningJeff Z. HaoChen, Tengyu MaICLR 2023 · 2 citations
- Generalization Analysis for Contrastive Representation LearningYunwen Lei, Tianbao Yang, Yiming Ying, Ding-Xuan ZhouICML 2023 · 28 citations
- Statistical Consistency and Generalization of Contrastive Representation LearningYuanfan Li, Xiyuan Wei, Tianbao Yang, Yiming YingICML 2026 · 1 citation
