The knowledge matrix of a trained feedforward network as a higher representation of its inputs is studied, grounding it in attribution theory and computing it by $C$ vector-Jacobian products instead of probing.
Abstract
We study the knowledge matrix of a trained feedforward network as a higher representation of its inputs. A network is a pair $(W,f)$, a thin representation $W$ of its quiver and an activation $f$; its function factorizes through the space of quiver representations, each input $x$ inducing a representation, and the knowledge matrix $M(x)\in\mathbb{R}^{C\times(d+1)}$ is the contraction of that representation to one matrix whose rows sum exactly to the logits. At one trained network we ask what determines it, what it is invariant to, what it determines, and what its geometry measures. Under (LCS), a locally constant slope diagonal, as for ReLU, the matrix at a regular input is a function of the realized germ; its stabilizer among encodings regular there is exactly the germ stabilizer at inputs with no vanishing coordinate, neuron permutation a special case; and it recovers the germ, whereas hidden activations, gauge-covariant and germ-incomplete, are not enough. Under (LCS) it equals per-class gradient$\times$input plus an exact aggregate bias attribution, grounding it in attribution theory and computing it by $C$ vector-Jacobian products instead of probing. The fixed shape gives an alignment-free per-sample distance between ResNet-152, DenseNet-121 and GoogLeNet; the row-sum identity gives an exact visible/invisible displacement decomposition whose unit-free coherence $A=(d_\Psi/d_M)^2$ puts adversarial germ motion at median $A\le 0.23$, with an attack-family ordering concordant across six architectures (Kendall $W=0.921$; $0.97$ on the three networks at full scale). Two honest negatives: on AlexNet/CIFAR-10 penultimate features win 5 of 6 detectors and all 16 attacks, and a matrix-direction counterfactual fails 0/54.
We consider a modular associative neural network made of $L$ Hopfield models (HMs), coupled so that intra-module interactions are Hebbian and inter-module interactions are anti-Hebbian; this competitive coupling is known to endow the network with pattern-disentanglement capabilities. The integral representation of this...
Elena Agliari, Andrea Lepre, Edoardo Roscani· 0 citations
A spherical-cap construction proves the latter claim without assuming sparsity merely on the sampling support without assuming sparsity merely on the sampling support, and obtains agnostic minimax excess-risk bounds of order up to logarithms.
Xiao-Yu Li, Zhizhou Sha, Jiao-Jiao Jiang et al.· 0 citations
A model generalizes outside its training distribution only when it computes a representation structurally equivalent to the generating mechanism, not an approximation fitted to it. Such equivalence is necessary for exactness in and out of distribution, and extrapolation is governed by this exactness at inference, whate...
Filipe Marinho Rocha, I. Dutra, V. Costa et al.· 0 citations
Learning$^2$ is introduced, a representation-level framework that structures this space by coupling a primary representation to a second representation through a known physical transformation, and the conditions under which a consequence representation provides discriminative constraints on candidate solutions are defi...
TFMs are introduced, realization-level Mathematical Structures in which a learned Operator maps a product of admissible component-section families to a prescribed family of time-dependent tangent sections on a Generative State Manifold.
When a network has learned a function with a known symmetry, can that symmetry be moved through the parametrisation---is there a motion in parameter space realising the group action in function space? We formulate this as a lifting problem for the realisation map $\Phi:\theta\mapsto f_\theta$, and show that a smooth pa...
Alan Muriithi, Vedanta Thapar, Torben Berndt· 0 citations
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 23, 2026
Assistant Professor Benjamin Lindquist studies how engineers deliberately injected randomness into early AI, giving rise to deep-learning models that sometimes hallucinate.