Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper critiques the conventional methods of measuring concept dimensions in neural representations, specifically through iterative erasure counts and cumulative ranks, which are shown to be sensitive to invertible reparameterizations. The authors distinguish between model-defined population quantities and procedure-defined metrics, revealing that traditional measures can yield inconsistent results under different transformations. Key findings demonstrate that while certain quantities remain invariant, cumulative erasure counts can significantly vary, indicating that these metrics do not accurately reflect intrinsic concept dimensions.
Iterative erasure counts can mislead researchers about the true dimensionality of concepts in neural representations, revealing a deeper complexity in how we measure and interpret these dimensions.
How many directions does a neural representation use to encode a concept? A common answer repeatedly erases probe directions and reports the stopping count or cumulative removed rank. We show that both quantities can change under an information-preserving invertible reparameterization, so neither is intrinsically a concept dimension. We distinguish model-defined population quantities (generating dimension, sufficient linear dimension, and minimum guarding rank) from procedure-defined quantities such as stopping count and cumulative edit rank. In a population Gaussian construction, an invertible shear preserves the prediction problem and all three quantities, yet changes the cumulative Euclidean erasure count from one to two. The separation holds for Moore--Penrose ordinary least squares and every finite nonnegative ridge weight. For a two-output full-QR procedure matching our motivating video analysis, cumulative edit rank similarly changes from two to the ambient dimension four. Conversely, the complete cumulative metric-QR trajectory is affine-equivariant when its positive-definite metric, probe, regularizer, and tie-breaking are transported consistently; exact covariance is one corollary, not a canonical semantic metric. In a known-rank finite-sample Adam/QR calibration, identity mixing stops after one accepted update in all 20 large-sample runs, whereas each tested shear $a\in\{.5,.75,1,1.25,2\}$ accepts at least two updates in all 20 runs. Controlled reparameterizations of frozen V-JEPA2 features preserve rank-zero predictions yet alter later Euclidean trajectories under practical optimization. These visual contact experiments are stress tests, not estimates of contact dimension. Iterative erasure therefore returns a procedure-relative estimand jointly determined by representation geometry and the full measurement procedure, not a semantic dimension by itself.
