Sparse Coding and Autoencoders
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In "Dictionary Learning" one tries to recover incoherent matrices A^* ∈ ℝn × h (typically overcomplete and whose columns are assumed to be normalized) and sparse vectors x^* ∈ ℝh with a small support of size hp for some 0 <p < 1 while having access to observations y ∈ ℝn where y = A^*x^*. In this work we undertake a rigorous analysis of whether gradient descent on the squared loss of an autoencoder can solve the dictionary learning problem. The "Autoencoder" architecture we consider is a ℝn rightarrow ℝn mapping with a single ReLU activation layer of size h. Under very mild distributional assumptions on x^*, we prove that the norm of the expected gradient of the standard squared loss function is asymptotically (in sparse code dimension) negligible for all points in a small neighborhood of A^*. This is supported with experimental evidence using synthetic data. We also conduct experiments to suggest that A^* is a local minimum. Along the way we prove that a layer of ReLU gates can be set up to automatically recover the support of the sparse codes. This property holds independent of the loss function. We believe that it could be of independent interest.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 12 Aug 2017.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 1; 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.
11 papers.
- 2024Measuring Progress in Dictionary Learning for Language Model Interpretability with Board Game Modelscited by 51
- 2025From Flat to Hierarchical: Extracting Sparse Representations with Matching Pursuitcited by 45
- 2021Stable and Interpretable Unrolled Dictionary Learningcited by 15
- 2021Analysis of feature learning in weight-tied autoencoders via the mean field lenscited by 13
- 2021On the convergence of group-sparse autoencoderscited by 3
- 2022Fundamental Limits of Two-layer Autoencoders, and Achieving Them with Gradient Methodscited by 3
- 2025Mechanistic Interpretability with Sparse Autoencoder Neural Operatorscited by 3
- 2023Robust Representation Learning for Privacy-Preserving Machine Learning: A Multi-Objective Autoencoder Approachcited by 2
- 2026Effects of sparsity and superposition on loss in simple autoencoderscited by 1
- 2023Sparse-Inductive Generative Adversarial Hashing for Nearest Neighbor Searchcited by 0
- 2026Interference Beyond Geometry in Concept Extractioncited by 0
- 2026Interference Beyond Geometry in Concept Extraction28 Sep 2026
- 2026Effects of sparsity and superposition on loss in simple autoencoders16 Jun 2026
- 2025Mechanistic Interpretability with Sparse Autoencoder Neural Operators3 Sep 2025
- 2025From Flat to Hierarchical: Extracting Sparse Representations with Matching Pursuit3 Jun 2025
- 2024Measuring Progress in Dictionary Learning for Language Model Interpretability with Board Game Models31 Jul 2024
- 2023Robust Representation Learning for Privacy-Preserving Machine Learning: A Multi-Objective Autoencoder Approach8 Sep 2023
- 2023Sparse-Inductive Generative Adversarial Hashing for Nearest Neighbor Search12 Jun 2023
- 2022Fundamental Limits of Two-layer Autoencoders, and Achieving Them with Gradient Methods27 Dec 2022
- 2021Stable and Interpretable Unrolled Dictionary Learning31 May 2021
- 2021Analysis of feature learning in weight-tied autoencoders via the mean field lens16 Feb 2021
- 2021On the convergence of group-sparse autoencoders13 Feb 2021