analiza aiqbench
This research clarifies that the squared norm of whitened embeddings is not a true Gaussian log-likelihood but rather a Mahalanobis measure of semantic atypicality. By exposing how whitening reverses spectral hierarchies to amplify noise, the study provides a more accurate theoretical framework for using these statistics in anomaly detection and calibration without relying on incorrect Gaussian assumptions.
Whitening Inverts the Hierarchy: What the Norm of a Whitened Embedding Measures
arXiv:2609.23117v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Whitening a foundation-model embedding and using its squared norm as a training-free likelihood surrogate is motivated by the observation that whitened coordinates often appear approximately standard normal. We show that this observation follows from the projection central limit theorem and therefore does not imply a Gaussian joint distribution. Across multiple encoders and three training objectives, we find systematic over-dispersion of the whitened radius relative to the Gaussian reference, including against distributional clones with identical mean and covariance. We further show that the commonly reported agreement between empirical and theoretical norm statistics is an algebraic consequence of in-sample whitening and does not constitute evidence for Gaussianity. We identify the mechanism behind this behavior: whitening reverses the encoder's spectral hierarchy, shifting the contribution to the squared norm toward near-degenerate directions that encode predominantly noise. In these directions, the dominant variability is governed by a single input-dependent scale. We estimate this scale from two moments and use it to predict, without additional free parameters, the cross-dependence between disjoint spectral halves. These results indicate that the squared whitened norm is better interpreted as a Mahalanobis measure of semantic atypicality than as a log-likelihood. This interpretation explains both its practical effectiveness and its calibration failures: the statistic can rank and detect atypical samples consistently with nonparametric density estimates and across encoders trained with different objectives, while Gaussian tail thresholds can be inaccurate by orders of magnitude. etc.
Abstract:Whitening a foundation-model embedding and using its squared norm as a training-free likelihood surrogate is motivated by the observation that whitened coordinates often appear approximately standard normal. We show that this observation follows from the projection central limit theorem and therefore does not imply a Gaussian joint distribution. Across multiple encoders and three training objectives, we find systematic over-dispersion of the whitened radius relative to the Gaussian reference, including against distributional clones with identical mean and covariance. We further show that the commonly reported agreement between empirical and theoretical norm statistics is an algebraic consequence of in-sample whitening and does not constitute evidence for Gaussianity. We identify the mechanism behind this behavior: whitening reverses the encoder's spectral hierarchy, shifting the contribution to the squared norm toward near-degenerate directions that encode predominantly noise. In these directions, the dominant variability is governed by a single input-dependent scale. We estimate this scale from two moments and use it to predict, without additional free parameters, the cross-dependence between disjoint spectral halves. These results indicate that the squared whitened norm is better interpreted as a Mahalanobis measure of semantic atypicality than as a log-likelihood. This interpretation explains both its practical effectiveness and its calibration failures: the statistic can rank and detect atypical samples consistently with nonparametric density estimates and across encoders trained with different objectives, while Gaussian tail thresholds can be inaccurate by orders of magnitude. etc.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2609.23117 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2609.23117v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.23117 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
code/mechanism.py
code/power_theory.py
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 · 331 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
The Continual Constitutional Convention: How language models revise the documents that govern them
AI Alignment Forum · 13 oct. 2026
The Active Ingredient in Muon's Grokking
arXiv · 24 iul. 2026

GEM Training: How Meta Doubled the Efficiency of Its LLM-Scale Ads Foundation Model
Meta Engineering · 3 aug. 2026
DAGR: State-Conditioned Goal Representations via Difference-Aware Goal Cross-Attention
arXiv · 5 oct. 2026