analiza aiqbench
This research establishes a rigorous statistical framework for distinguishing between nominal LoRA ranks and the calibrated effective rank actually utilized by foundation model adapters. By deriving exact finite-sample bounds and leveraging spectral evidence, the study reveals that effective rank is typically significantly lower than design parameters suggest, challenging standard energy retention heuristics. This methodological advance provides auditors with a precise tool to assess adapter efficiency without conflating statistical surprise with task utility metrics.
Spectral Rank Certification for Foundation Model Adapters
arXiv:2608.15351v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Nominal LoRA rank is a design parameter; calibrated spectral evidence is a separate inferential quantity. This article develops a finite-sample framework for inferring effective rank structure in public foundation-model adapters. The theoretical core is an exact chi-square divergence for the fixed-dimensional Gaussian rank-one reference experiment, with an unknown signal direction integrated under a rotation-invariant reference prior. The resulting series yields a computable finite-sample Le Cam bound at concrete layer sizes, an explicit remainder bound for numerical truncation, and the rectangular Baik-Ben Arous-Peche (BBP) limit. A compact-manifold Laplace expansion shows that finite-sample likelihood evidence also depends on leading spectral gaps through the factor $s_1^{|m-n|}\prod_{i\ge2}(s_1^2-s_i^2)$, motivating joint calibration of clustered singular values. Building on these results, we introduce an empirical-null workflow for PEFT LoRA adapters: factor reconstruction, Monte Carlo $p$-values, stagewise and block testing, and module-wise and corpus-level BH reporting. In an audit of 26 public adapters, 684 modules, six architecture families, and 31,770 public-checkpoint spectra rows, calibrated effective rank is typically much smaller than nominal rank and differs systematically from 95\% energy retention. A measured RoBERTa-RTE slice on $n=24$ examples illustrates the measurement path from calibrated ranks to task evaluation, without treating the slice as a utility study. The main empirical finding is that calibrated effective rank is usually far below nominal rank, and that energy retention and statistical surprise answer different questions.
Abstract:Nominal LoRA rank is a design parameter; calibrated spectral evidence is a separate inferential quantity. This article develops a finite-sample framework for inferring effective rank structure in public foundation-model adapters. The theoretical core is an exact chi-square divergence for the fixed-dimensional Gaussian rank-one reference experiment, with an unknown signal direction integrated under a rotation-invariant reference prior. The resulting series yields a computable finite-sample Le Cam bound at concrete layer sizes, an explicit remainder bound for numerical truncation, and the rectangular Baik-Ben Arous-Peche (BBP) limit. A compact-manifold Laplace expansion shows that finite-sample likelihood evidence also depends on leading spectral gaps through the factor $s_1^{|m-n|}\prod_{i\ge2}(s_1^2-s_i^2)$, motivating joint calibration of clustered singular values. Building on these results, we introduce an empirical-null workflow for PEFT LoRA adapters: factor reconstruction, Monte Carlo $p$-values, stagewise and block testing, and module-wise and corpus-level BH reporting. In an audit of 26 public adapters, 684 modules, six architecture families, and 31,770 public-checkpoint spectra rows, calibrated effective rank is typically much smaller than nominal rank and differs systematically from 95\% energy retention. A measured RoBERTa-RTE slice on $n=24$ examples illustrates the measurement path from calibrated ranks to task evaluation, without treating the slice as a utility study. The main empirical finding is that calibrated effective rank is usually far below nominal rank, and that energy retention and statistical surprise answer different questions.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Methodology (stat.ME)
arXiv:2608.15351 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2608.15351v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.15351 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 · 318 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Reuse or Relearn? A Spectral View of Earth Observation Foundation Models
arXiv · 30 sept. 2026

Reflections on unlearning and inoculation
LessWrong · 20 sept. 2026
SPECTRA: Band-Routed Embedding and Stage-Wise LoRA for Cross-Sensor Fine-Tuning of Geospatial Foundation Models
arXiv · 5 aug. 2026
Closed-Form Spectral Regularization for Multi-Task Model Merging
arXiv · 8 iun. 2026