analiza aiqbench
This research introduces a refined metric for estimating the representational capacity of Transformer models by correcting the standard Johnson-Lindenstrauss lemma to account for near-orthogonality constraints in latent space. The study reveals that capacity is exponentially sensitive to deviation from perfect orthogonality ($\varepsilon$), showing that larger models increasingly prioritize stability over raw feature packing efficiency. For practitioners, this provides a more accurate theoretical framework for predicting how many distinct concepts a model can encode without explicit architectural changes.
Representational Capacity: Geometric Limits on Feature Representation in Transformer Language Models
arXiv:2606.02765v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Model dimension ($d_{model}$) is a fundamental hyperparameter in transformer language models, yet its role in setting the geometric limits of feature representation remains under-explored. Grounded in the Linear Representation and Superposition Hypotheses - which propose that models encode features as near-orthogonal directions in latent space - we develop a framework for estimating how many such directions a model can support. We first establish the embedding matrix as a measurable proxy for near-orthogonality constraints across the latent space: the boundary between meaningful token relationships and incidental similarity in the pairwise cosine similarity distribution gives a concrete estimate of the model's accepted deviation $\varepsilon$ from perfect orthogonality. Applying this metric across dozens of open-source models reveals two classes: models with high $\varepsilon$ whose embeddings lack near-orthogonal structure, and models with low $\varepsilon$ that maintain it. We then show that the standard Johnson-Lindenstrauss lemma greatly underestimates the packing efficiency of trained representations, and derive an adjusted capacity formula in which the number of near-orthogonal directions depends on the ratio of vectors to dimensions ($k/d$) rather than the raw count - a single modification that cuts prediction error by two orders of magnitude with no extra parameters. Combining these results, we define representational capacity as an upper bound on the number of distinguishable directions available for features and embeddings in a model's latent space. Capacity is exponentially sensitive to $\varepsilon$, and larger models favor tighter orthogonality constraints over maximizing raw capacity - a pattern compatible with several explanations (a stability-capacity trade-off, a ceiling on usable concepts, or confounds with model scale) that we leave to future work.
Abstract:Model dimension ($d_{model}$) is a fundamental hyperparameter in transformer language models, yet its role in setting the geometric limits of feature representation remains under-explored. Grounded in the Linear Representation and Superposition Hypotheses - which propose that models encode features as near-orthogonal directions in latent space - we develop a framework for estimating how many such directions a model can support. We first establish the embedding matrix as a measurable proxy for near-orthogonality constraints across the latent space: the boundary between meaningful token relationships and incidental similarity in the pairwise cosine similarity distribution gives a concrete estimate of the model's accepted deviation $\varepsilon$ from perfect orthogonality. Applying this metric across dozens of open-source models reveals two classes: models with high $\varepsilon$ whose embeddings lack near-orthogonal structure, and models with low $\varepsilon$ that maintain it. We then show that the standard Johnson-Lindenstrauss lemma greatly underestimates the packing efficiency of trained representations, and derive an adjusted capacity formula in which the number of near-orthogonal directions depends on the ratio of vectors to dimensions ($k/d$) rather than the raw count - a single modification that cuts prediction error by two orders of magnitude with no extra parameters. Combining these results, we define representational capacity as an upper bound on the number of distinguishable directions available for features and embeddings in a model's latent space. Capacity is exponentially sensitive to $\varepsilon$, and larger models favor tighter orthogonality constraints over maximizing raw capacity - a pattern compatible with several explanations (a stability-capacity trade-off, a ceiling on usable concepts, or confounds with model scale) that we leave to future work.
22 pages, 10 figures. Submitted to NeurIPS 2026. This is a condensed version of thesis: this https URL
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2606.02765 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2606.02765v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.02765 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 378 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

When should we trust a latent representation?
LessWrong · 4 aug. 2026
Generalized belief states in transformers
LessWrong · 31 oct. 2026

Exploring Hierarchical Interest Representation For Meta Ads Deep Funnel Optimization
Meta Engineering · 15 iul. 2026
J++ Lens: Jacobian Filtering Enables More Faithful Workspace Lenses
LessWrong · 8 oct. 2026