Frame Theoretical Derivation of Three Factor Learning Rule for Oja's Subspace Rule

We decompose the Kullback--Leibler generalization error (GE) -- the expected KL divergence from the data distribution to the trained model -- of unsupervised learning into three non-negative components: model error, data bias, and variance. The decomposition is exact for any e-flat model class and follows from two identities of information geometry: the generalized Pythagorean theorem and a dual e-mixture variance identity. As an analytically tractable demonstration, we apply the framework to $ε$-PCA, a regularized principal component analysis in which the empirical covariance is truncated at rank $N_K$ and discarded directions are pinned at a fixed noise floor $ε$. Although rank-constrained $ε$-PCA is not itself e-flat, it admits a technical reformulation with the same total GE on isotropic Gaussian data, under which each component of the decomposition takes closed form. The optimal rank emerges as the cutoff $λ_{\mathrm{cut}}^{*} = ε$ -- the model retains exactly those empirical eigenvalues exceeding the noise floor -- with the cutoff reflecting a marginal-rate balance between model-error gain and data-bias cost. A boundary comparison further yields a three-regime phase diagram -- retain-all, interior, and collapse -- separated by the lower Marchenko--Pastur edge and an analytically computable collapse threshold $ε_{*}(α)$, where $α$ is the dimension-to-sample-size ratio. All claims are verified numerically.

Random, untrained neural networks consistently match or exceed trained networks in representational similarity to early visual cortex. This puzzling finding challenges the assumption that learning improves brain alignment. We investigate it by tracking representational similarity analysis (RSA) alignment to human fMRI data across training for four learning rules: backpropagation (BP), feedback alignment (FA), predictive coding (PC), and spike-timing-dependent plasticity (STDP). Using 720 object images from the THINGS database and fMRI data from three subjects across six visual ROIs, we measure Spearman correlations between model and brain representational dissimilarity matrices at eight training checkpoints (epochs 0-40). We find that (1) a single epoch of training reduces V1 alignment by 25-90%, depending on the learning rule; (2) backpropagation reduces V1 alignment most severely (delta r = -0.080), while predictive coding and STDP preserve substantially more (delta r ~ -0.04); and (3) a weaker, opposite tendency appears in object-selective cortex (LOC), where BP shows the largest increase in alignment during training, although the absolute change is small. These results suggest that untrained architectures capture low-level visual statistics through inductive biases alone, and that global error signals (BP) reshape early representations more aggressively than local learning rules (PC, STDP), which better preserve brain-like structure.

A central question in computational neuroscience is whether the learning rule used to train a neural network determines how well its internal representations align with those of the human visual cortex. We present a systematic comparison of four learning rules (backpropagation (BP), feedback alignment (FA), predictive coding (PC), and spike-timing-dependent plasticity (STDP)) applied to identical convolutional architectures and evaluated against human fMRI data from the THINGS-fMRI dataset (720 stimuli, 3 subjects) using Representational Similarity Analysis (RSA). All models process stimuli at 224 x 224 resolution; results are averaged across 5 random seeds. Crucially, we include an untrained random-weights baseline that reveals the dominant role of architecture. At V1/V2, the untrained baseline exceeds backpropagation (rho = 0.076 vs. rho = 0.034; Delta-rho = +0.044, p < 0.001), and STDP achieves the highest V1 alignment among trained rules (rho = 0.064). At LOC, only BP reliably exceeds the random baseline (rho = 0.012 vs. -0.005, p < 0.001). At IT, all five conditions converge (rho = 0.008-0.014) with no significant pairwise differences among trained rules (p > 0.05, FDR-corrected). FA consistently produces the lowest alignment at V1, V2, and LOC (rho = 0.012 at V1, below all other conditions). Partial RSA confirms all effects survive pixel-similarity control. Seed variability is small relative to between-rule differences at V1/V2. These results demonstrate that early visual alignment is architecture-driven, learning rules differentiate only at intermediate areas, and all rules converge at the highest levels of the hierarchy.