Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This paper introduces the "Bell Boundary," a novel theoretical limit derived from Bell's theorem that quantifies when shared representations in multi-task models fail due to capacity constraints. By demonstrating that limited representational capacity can induce correlations exceeding the classical CHSH bound, the study provides a measurable diagnostic for task incompatibility across CNNs, PLMs, and LLMs. This work offers critical insights into representation bottlenecks and capacity allocation strategies essential for optimizing multi-task learning architectures.
Sources coveringarXiv, AI Alignment Forum
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

The Bell Boundary of Shared Representations

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2610.16828v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: When does a shared representation become insufficient for jointly supporting multiple tasks? This question lies at the heart of multi-task learning models. Although task interference in shared representations has been widely observed, its onset, measurable form, and capacity boundary remain poorly understood. In this paper, we revisit this problem through the lens of Bell's theorem. We show that if four binary task outcomes can be jointly represented by a common shared representation, their correlations must satisfy the classical CHSH bound $|S|\leq2$. We introduce NCnet, a controlled multi-task model for studying how representational capacity affects task compatibility. Experiments reveal a clear capacity-dependent transition. Once nontrivial task fitting emerges, constrained capacity can yield $|S|>2$. As capacity further increases, these exceedances progressively disappear and $S$ returns to the bounded region. This systematic pattern provides evidence that limited representational capacity is an important source of the observed incompatibility. We observe similar transitions across CNNs, PLMs, and LLMs, suggesting that the phenomenon extends beyond the controlled NCnet setting. We refer to this capacity-dependent transition as the Bell Boundary, providing a measurable diagnostic for representation bottlenecks, task incompatibility, and capacity allocation in multi-task models.

Abstract:When does a shared representation become insufficient for jointly supporting multiple tasks? This question lies at the heart of multi-task learning models. Although task interference in shared representations has been widely observed, its onset, measurable form, and capacity boundary remain poorly understood. In this paper, we revisit this problem through the lens of Bell's theorem. We show that if four binary task outcomes can be jointly represented by a common shared representation, their correlations must satisfy the classical CHSH bound $|S|\leq2$. We introduce NCnet, a controlled multi-task model for studying how representational capacity affects task compatibility. Experiments reveal a clear capacity-dependent transition. Once nontrivial task fitting emerges, constrained capacity can yield $|S|>2$. As capacity further increases, these exceedances progressively disappear and $S$ returns to the bounded region. This systematic pattern provides evidence that limited representational capacity is an important source of the observed incompatibility. We observe similar transitions across CNNs, PLMs, and LLMs, suggesting that the phenomenon extends beyond the controlled NCnet setting. We refer to this capacity-dependent transition as the Bell Boundary, providing a measurable diagnostic for representation bottlenecks, task incompatibility, and capacity allocation in multi-task models.

Machine Learning (cs.LG); Computation and Language (cs.CL)

arXiv:2610.16828 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2610.16828v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.16828 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 286 words

Related coverage