Diagnosing Generalization Failures from Representational Geometry Markers
Organizations: Flatiron Institute · Harvard University · Google DeepMind
Abstract
Generalization, the ability to perform well beyond the training context, is a hallmark of biological and artificial intelligence, yet anticipating unseen failures remains a central challenge. Conventional approaches often take a bottom-up'' mechanistic route by reverse-engineering interpretable features or circuits to build explanatory models. While insightful, these methods often struggle to provide the high-level, predictive signals for anticipating failure in real-world deployment. Here, we propose using a top-down'' approach to studying generalization failures inspired by medical biomarkers: identifying system-level measurements that serve as robust indicators of a model's future performance. Rather than mapping out detailed internal mechanisms, we systematically design and test network markers to probe structure, function links, identify prognostic indicators, and validate predictions in real-world settings. In image classification, we find that task-relevant geometric properties of in-distribution (ID) object manifolds consistently forecast poor out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization. In particular, reductions in two geometric measures, effective manifold dimensionality and utility, predict weaker OOD performance across diverse architectures, optimizers, and datasets. We apply this finding to transfer learning with ImageNet-pretrained models. We consistently find that the same geometric patterns predict OOD transfer performance more reliably than ID accuracy. This work demonstrates that representational geometry can expose hidden vulnerabilities, offering more robust guidance for model selection and AI interpretability.
Figures & tables
| Geometric intuition | Quantify the task-relevant dimensionality of object manifolds. | Quantify the task-relevant spread within each manifold relative to their centers. | Quantify the amount of excessive compression of untangling manifolds. |
| Effect on linear separability | More separable when is small. | More separable when is small. | More separable when is large. |
| Example | equals the dimension of uncor. random spheres | equals the radius of uncor. random spheres | Collapsing manifolds to points yields . |
| Interpretation in feature learning 5 5 5 This figure is a schematic illustration of the non-uniform, task-relevant anchor point distribution. The 2D depiction is only intuitive and can be misleading, analogous to how in high dimensions Gaussian mass concentrates on the sphere rather than at the origin. | Low indicates a smaller set of feature modes in use. | Low indicates more similar feature usage across examples within a class. | Low indicates inefficient compression of within-class variability. |
Appendix figures & tables24 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Experimental Setting | In-Distribution (ID) Dataset | Out-of-Distribution (OOD) Datasets |
|---|---|---|
| Prognostic discovery ( Section 3 ) | CIFAR-10 | CIFAR-100 ImageNet-1k (resized to 32x32) |
| Transfer Learning Applications ( Section 4 ) | ImageNet-1k | Flowers102 Stanford Cars Places365 Oxford-IIIT Pets Food-101 iNaturalist 2018 DTD FGVC-Aircraft HAM10000 |
| Architecture | Layer name in PyTorch module |
|---|---|
| VGG13 | features.34 |
| VGG16 | features.43 |
| VGG19 | features.52 |
| ResNet | avgpool |
| DenseNet121 | avg_pool2d |
| MobileNet | avg_pool2d |
| Geometric intuition | Quantify the task-relevant dimensionality of object manifolds. | Quantify the task-relevant spread within each manifold relative to their centers. | Quantify the amount of excessive compression of untangling manifolds . |
| Effect on linear separability | More separable when is small. | More separable when is small. | More separable when is large. |
| Example | equals the dimension of uncor. random spheres | equals the radius of uncor. random spheres | Collapsing manifolds to points yields . |
| Formula for uncorrelated random spheres 6 6 footnotemark: 6 | |||
| Interaction with correlations among manifolds | If within-manifold variations align along similar directions, decreases. | If manifold centers move farther apart, decreases. | If within-manifold variations reduce without improving separability, decreases. |
| Interpretation in feature learning 7 7 footnotemark: 7 | Low indicates a smaller set of feature modes in use. | Low indicates more similar feature usage across examples within a class. | Low indicates inefficient compression of within-class variability. |
| Architecture | Initial learning rate list | Weight decay list |
|---|---|---|
| VGG (13/16/19) | [0.01000, 0.00333, 0.00111, 0.00037] | [0.0010000, 0.0003333, 0.0001111, 0.0000370] |
| ResNet (18/34/50) | [1.00000, 0.50000, 0.25000, 0.12500] | [0.0002000, 0.0001000, 0.0000500, 0.0000250] |
| DenseNet121 | [0.05000, 0.01667, 0.00556, 0.00185] | [0.0005000, 0.0001667, 0.0000556, 0.0000185] |
| MobileNet | [0.20000, 0.06667, 0.02222, 0.00741] | [0.0001000, 0.0000333, 0.0000111, 0.0000037] |
| EfficientNetB0 | [0.20000, 0.06667, 0.02222, 0.00741] | [0.0001000, 0.0000333, 0.0000111, 0.0000037] |
| Architecture | Initial learning rate list | Weight decay list |
|---|---|---|
| VGG (13/16/19) | [0.02000, 0.00500, 0.00125, 0.00031] | [0.0100000, 0.0033333, 0.0011111, 0] |
| ResNet (18/34/50) | [0.10000, 0.02500, 0.00625, 0.00156] | [0.0100000, 0.0050000, 0.0025000, 0] |
| DenseNet121 | [0.05000, 0.02500, 0.01250, 0.00625] | [0.0100000, 0.0033333, 0.0011111, 0] |
| MobileNet | [0.02000, 0.00500, 0.00125, 0.04000] | [0.0100000, 0.0033333, 0.0011111, 0] |
| EfficientNetB0 | [0.10000, 0.05000, 0.01000, 0.00100] | [0.0010000, 0.0003333, 0.0001111, 0] |
| Figure label | Model set | Optimizer | ID split | OOD dataset |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Figure 7 | Five DNNs | SGD | Train | CIFAR-100 |
| Figure 8 | Five DNNs | SGD | Test | CIFAR-100 |
| Figure 9 | Five DNNs | AdamW | Train | CIFAR-100 |
| Figure 10 | Five DNNs | AdamW | Test | CIFAR-100 |
| Figure 11 | Three ResNets + Three VGGs | SGD | Train | CIFAR-100 |
| Figure 12 | Three ResNets + Three VGGs | SGD | Test | CIFAR-100 |
Neural Network Generalization
Neural network generalization studies why trained models perform well on unseen data and how architecture, data, and training shape that ability.
See all 303 papers