Compressed Computation is (probably) not Computation in Superposition

Neural networks are thought to represent concepts as directions in their activation space, and superposition lets them encode more concepts than they have dimensions. It is natural to ask whether they can also compute more functions than they have neurons, i.e., perform computation in superposition. In this regime many functions of sparse inputs are evaluated by a layer with fewer neurons than there are functions to compute. Representation in superposition is by now fairly well understood, but computation in superposition is not, and there are few toy models of it arising through training rather than being hand designed. As a toy model of computation in superposition we study the compressed-computation setup: a single-hidden-layer ReLU network with 50 neurons that must compute the ReLU of each of 100 sparse input features. We show that training it under an $L^4$ loss (the mean fourth power of the error), rather than the usual $L^2$, elicits a solution that appears to compute all features in superposition. We then reverse-engineer this solution. We find that the network assigns each feature a sparse binary codeword over neurons and decodes it with a pseudoinverse of the encoder. Given these codewords, a description with only three scalars recovers most of the network's performance, and we validate it by building equivalent networks from hand-designed codes.

Two recent approaches to computation in superposition reach different recursive capacity regimes: Hänni et al. certify $\tilde{O}(d^{3/2})$ computable features in width $d$ via an approximate-linear recursive template, while Adler and Shavit reach near-quadratic capacity (up to logarithmic factors) using thresholded Boolean recovery. The main contribution of this paper is conceptual: we argue these results are not contradictory because they maintain different interface invariants, and we formalize the distinction. As a tool, we record a rank-trace Welch-type lower bound for biorthogonal linear readouts: for $F \gg d$, the worst-case off-diagonal cross-talk of any unit-diagonal linear readout is $Ω(d^{-1/2})$, and the bound is tight on average for unit-norm tight frames. At quadratic feature load $F=d^2$, random-support threshold recovery succeeds for sparsities $s=O(d/\log d)$, while linear readouts still incur $Ω(s/d)$ average per-coordinate squared error on Bernoulli sparse states. Matching the Welch floor against the published tolerance of the Hänni correction layer explains the $d^{3/2}$ scale as a compatibility threshold for that template, not a universal upper bound. Robust nonlinear reset beyond the Hänni template is left open.

Many classically studied function classes are known to be approximated optimally by superpositional methods, i.e. with approximants constructed as the linear combination of elements in some dictionary. Here optimality means that the uniform approximation error viewed as a function of the number of parameters used has polynomial decay of the highest order achievable by any parametrized method whose parameters can be encoded as a bit string of length proportional, up to logarithmic factors, to the number of parameters. While compositional methods like neural networks are structurally different, their approximation rates can be made comparable by imposing constraints that ensure such a proportional bit string encoding. In this work we study function classes exhibiting structural properties that limit superpositional approximation rates to be strictly lower than compositional approximation rates. In particular, we construct explicit examples for which there is an arbitrarily large gap.