Data-free preconditioning builds the Kronecker factors of KFAC from synthetic probes instead of private data. DP-KFC validates a probe by matching the eigenvalue decay of the private factors; we turn this criterion into a random-matrix account of what a probe can reconstruct. A single dichotomy organizes it: in the factorization A⊗G, the error-signal factor G and the architecture-determined bulk of the activation factor A are reconstructible without data, while only the data-induced spikes of A are not. We prove the G half is data-insensitive up to an explicit error-energy bound, with zero violations over a full training trajectory across four modalities and a natural-image benchmark. We locate the failure boundary at a Baik-Ben Arous-Péché threshold: a bulk-only probe suffers an exact damage s2/(1−s2) from a data-induced spike, which becomes invisible once it exceeds (d/n)1/4, confirmed on an injected-spike surrogate. Holding the probe spectrum fixed and varying only its eigenbasis, we show that spectral-shape matching is neither sufficient nor the operative object: a probe with a near-exact matched spectrum (log-ratio dispersion 0.02) still inflates the residual 2×-90× when its eigenvectors are random. A closed-form whitened-volume law explains this and predicts the within-spectrum ordering of the critical volume, though not its cross-dataset magnitude. Downstream, per-layer tuning does not transfer to accuracy and the headroom is a small oracle-minus-white gap. Under a privacy mechanism the source ordering survives while learning does, then inverts at a noise cross-over where the flat probe overtakes the matched ones.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: Overview. (a) Data-free two-factor anatomy: the private mini-batch is unavailable, so a probe built from public or synthetic spectra supplies both Kronecker factors, combined into the preconditioner M=A⊗G applied blockwise per layer. (b) The basis-first inversion (input layer, eight dataset configurations): relative to the white probe, a probe with the matched spectrum in the aligned basis sits at 0.74 – 1.00× on every modality, while the same eigenvalues in a Haar-random basis inflate the bulk residual by 2.1× (PathMNIST) to 82.7× (DermaMNIST); the two arms share a bitwise-identical log-ratio dispersion ( 0.286130 on DermaMNIST). (c) The whitened-volume law: relative bulk-residual damage against the number K of rotated top eigendirections; open circles mark the empirical K⋆ ( 128 on OCTMNIST and DermaMNIST, 192 on TissueMNIST, 320 on CIFAR-10, not reached on PathMNIST up to K=512 ). The closed form detM=1 , E[trM]=(trΛ)(trΛ−1)/d predicts this ordering from the spectrum alone.
Fig. 2: Refinement of the failure boundary. (a) The exact threshold sc=(c/(1+c))1/2 tracks the crossing-based empirical estimate across aspect ratios, while the leading-order form c1/4 overstates it. (b) The empirical threshold converges to the exact value as the dimension grows at fixed c=0.25 . (c) For an anisotropic bulk the threshold is a functional of the bulk spectrum: βc/b+≈0.49 for an isotropic bulk (with c=0.5 ) and ≈2.24 for power-law bulks, independent of the exponent. Numbers from verify_boundary_law (MC, archived in figs/boundary_refine_data.json).
Fig. 3: Controlled verdict of the basis hypothesis. Left: bulk residual against the rotation scale θ of the probe basis at fixed spectrum: the residual is a step function of basis mixing, while the spectral dispersion (right axis family) is bitwise invariant along the rotation. Right: the loss of Fourier concentration of the probe; the random-basis value is ≈8.5×10−3 .
modality
oracle
white
global α∗
tailored
DermaMNIST
0.129
0.104
0.115
0.111
±.022
±.006
±.022
±.018
OCTMNIST
0.124
0.101
0.104
0.101
±.009
±.009
±.007
±.003
CIFAR-10
0.176
0.112
0.105
0.106
±.010
±.005
±.012
±.012
TABLE I: Downstream accuracy under four probe regimes (mean of the last three epochs of balanced accuracy, mean ± std over ten seeds, σ=0 DP-SGD, eight epochs). The oracle arm is an upper reference, not a method.
σ
ε
private
aligned
white
0.0
–
0.322
0.329
0.130
0.1
1.1×104
0.217
0.222
0.132
0.2
274
0.155
0.157
0.134
0.3
86
0.126
0.132
0.155
0.5
16.6
0.110
0.114
0.128
TABLE II: Noise tolerance and the source-ordering cross-over (PathMNIST, four seeds, mean of the last three epochs, learning rate 0.03 ; majority-class rate 0.143 ; ε from RDP accounting). The matched sources lead below σ=0.3 ; the flat white probe leads above it.
Fig. 4: DP-noise mechanism experiment (75 runs). (a) Final test accuracy falls below the majority-class rate for every training source once σ>0 . (b) On the true-DP models, noise first removes the activation-factor spike (top-1 fraction 0.330→0.025 ) and later re-concentrates the error factor ( 0.030→0.138 ). (c) The log-ratio mismatch of the aligned public probe stays an order of magnitude below all alternatives at every σ , but the surviving structure is operationally irrelevant.
Appendix figures & tables14 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
σ
ε (RDP)
optimal order
steps
0.0
no formal guarantee
n/a
948
0.5
16.556
1.9
948
1.0
2.350
6.6
948
2.0
0.780
18.0
948
4.0
0.338
36.0
948
Appendix
TABLE III: Privacy budget of the DP-noise mechanism experiment (PathMNIST, n=20000 , batch 256 , T=948 , δ=5×10−5 ).
σ
top-1 ( A , L2)
top-1 ( G )
βo
βg
0.0
0.330±.018
0.203±.042
−0.695
−0.746
0.5
0.025±.001
0.030±.006
−0.265
−0.561
1.0
0.020±.001
0.038±.008
−0.264
−0.737
2.0
0.019±.001
0.093±.043
−0.264
−1.057
4.0
0.018±.001
0.138±.067
−0.263
−1.632
aligned-probe lr_std (L2): 0.028 – 0.037 at all σ
Appendix
TABLE IV: Live-oracle spectral statistics of Section VIII (private-oracle source, PathMNIST). βo and βg are the live tail exponents of the activation and error factors; top-1 fractions are spike shares of the live spectrum.
source
σ=0
0.5
1.0
2.0
4.0
private oracle
0.264
0.099
0.105
0.105
0.103
public (aligned)
0.267
0.101
0.099
0.101
0.100
public (OCTMNIST)
0.252
0.101
0.101
0.098
0.098
synthetic 1/f
0.119
0.086
0.147
0.145
0.126
synthetic white
0.133
0.148
0.153
0.130
0.121
Appendix
TABLE V: Final test accuracy by source and noise multiplier (Section VIII ; majority-class rate 0.143 ).
Fig. 5: Activation-spectrum matching: the oracle tail exponent βo steepens from the first hidden layer to the output layer on every modality, while the reachable range of the α∈[0,3] probe family is a narrow band. The layer-optimal probe exponent tracks the oracle exponent only where the two ranges overlap.
Fig. 6: Downstream transfer test. Left three panels: balanced accuracy curves under the four probe regimes. Right: accuracy deltas against the white baseline with seed-combined standard errors. Per-layer tailoring does not improve on a single global exponent.
modality
βo (input)
K⋆
res. at K=512
OCTMNIST
−2.23
128
32.6×
DermaMNIST
−2.06
128
54.0×
TissueMNIST
−1.78
192
6.0×
CIFAR-10
−1.58
320
1.9×
PathMNIST
−1.08
not reached
1.0×
Appendix
TABLE VII: Critical misaligned volume K⋆ from the dense scan K∈{8,…,512} (first K with relative damage above 5% ), against the input-layer tail exponent βo of the private bulk (the scan is performed at the input layer). Damage beyond K⋆ grows superlinearly on steep spectra and is bounded by the Haar-basis asymptote.
Fig. 7: Volume scan of the misaligned subspace. Relative bulk residual against the number K of rotated top eigendirections. The critical volume moves monotonically with the steepness of the data spectrum, and the bottom-block arm stays mild everywhere.
Fig. 8: Eigenvalue diagnostics invert in the steep regime: layer-wise Spearman correlation between spectral dispersion and the bulk residual over the extended probe grid. Negatives concentrate at flat inputs, overly steep inputs, and steep output layers.
s
0.0
0.25
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.75
0.85
1.0
1.25
1.5
top-1/bulk
1.004
1.004
1.005
1.017
1.126
1.259
1.865
783.8
783.8
783.8
Appendix
TABLE VIII: Injected-spike sweep ( d=784 , n=4096 , d/n=0.191 , predicted sc=0.661 ): ratio of the sample top eigenvalue to the bulk edge, mean over 3 seeds. The ratio jumps between s=0.6 (below threshold) and s=0.7 (above threshold); at s≥1 the population covariance is rank-one and the ratio saturates at d .
dataset
psdF
psdR
eigR
white
psdR/psdF
PathMNIST
0.981
2.22
2.19
0.981
2.3×
OCTMNIST
1.043
56.55
53.78
1.399
54.2×
DermaMNIST
0.968
86.89
80.87
1.097
89.8×
TissueMNIST
0.932
30.36
28.78
1.025
32.6×
CIFAR-10 (32px subset)
0.941
31.11
29.73
1.012
33.1×
CIFAR-100 (10 classes)
0.972
18.67
19.52
0.982
19.2×
Appendix
TABLE IX: Universality across eight dataset configurations (Section VI-C ).
Fig. 9: Dataset sweep behind Table IX : input-layer bulk residual by probe family over eight dataset configurations. The Fourier-aligned profile (psdF) tracks the white baseline on every configuration; the Haar-basis variants separate on all but the near-isotropic PathMNIST input spectrum.
dataset
arch
psdF
psdR
white
psdR/psdF
PathMNIST
MLP
0.981
2.22
0.981
2.3×
PathMNIST
CNN
0.120
0.494
0.497
4.1×
DermaMNIST
MLP
0.968
86.89
1.097
89.8×
DermaMNIST
CNN
0.119
0.668
0.671
5.6×
CIFAR-100
MLP
0.972
18.67
0.982
19.2×
CIFAR-100
CNN
0.099
0.607
0.610
6.2×
Appendix
TABLE X: Architecture control (Section VI-C ).
Fig. 10: Architecture sweep behind Table X : on the convolutional oracle the Haar-basis probe collapses onto the white-noise baseline while the Fourier-aligned probe sits at one quarter to one sixth of it; on the MLP oracle the Haar mismatch amplifies further.