Input-Label Correlation Governs a Linear-to-Nonlinear Transition in Random Features under Spiked Covariance
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Random feature models (RFMs), two-layer networks with a randomly initialized fixed first layer and a trained linear readout, are among the simplest nonlinear predictors. Prior asymptotic analyses in the proportional high-dimensional regime show that, under isotropic data, RFMs reduce to noisy linear models and offer no advantage over classical linear methods such as ridge regression. Yet RFMs frequently outperform linear baselines on structured real data. We show that this tension is explained by a correlation-driven phase transition: under spiked-covariance designs, the interaction between anisotropy and input-label correlation determines whether the RFM behaves as an effectively linear predictor or exhibits genuinely nonlinear gains. Concretely, we establish a universality principle under anisotropy and characterize the RFM generalization error via an equivalent noisy polynomial model. The effective degree of this polynomial, equivalently, which Hermite orders of the activation survive, is governed by the strength of input-label correlation, yielding an explicit boundary in the correlation-spike-magnitude plane. Below the boundary, the RFM collapses to a linear surrogate and can underperform strong linear baselines; above it, higher-order terms persist and the RFM achieves a clear nonlinear advantage. Numerical simulations and real-data experiments corroborate the theory and delineate the transition between these two regimes.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Sep 2024.
Builds on
25 of 49 references.
References · 25
- 2018Reconciling modern machine learning practice and the bias-variance trade-offcited by 927
- 2019The generalization error of random features regression: Precise asymptotics and double descent curvecited by 413
- 2018Estimating the intrinsic dimension of datasets by a minimal neighborhood informationcited by 250
- 2022Neural Networks can Learn Representations with Gradient Descentcited by 161
- 2019Linearized two-layers neural networks in high dimensioncited by 155
- 2020When Do Neural Networks Outperform Kernel Methods?cited by 150
- 2022High-dimensional Asymptotics of Feature Learning: How One Gradient Step Improves the Representationcited by 150
- 2020Generalisation error in learning with random features and the hidden manifold modelcited by 127
- 2020The Gaussian equivalence of generative models for learning with shallow neural networkscited by 113
- 2020Optimal Regularization Can Mitigate Double Descentcited by 109
- 2019Scaling description of generalization with number of parameters in deep learningcited by 83
- 2017A Random Matrix Approach to Neural Networkscited by 80
13 more
- 2022Universality of empirical risk minimizationcited by 75
- 2023A Theory of Non-Linear Feature Learning with One Gradient Step in Two-Layer Neural Networkscited by 49
- 2024Asymptotics of feature learning in two-layer networks after one gradient-stepcited by 38
- 2023Deterministic equivalent and error universality of deep random features learningcited by 35
- 2023Gradient-Based Feature Learning under Structured Datacited by 32
- 2022An Equivalence Principle for the Spectrum of Random Inner-Product Kernel Matrices with Polynomial Scalingscited by 27
- 2022Gaussian Universality of Perceptrons with Random Labelscited by 26
- 2023Are Gaussian data all you need? Extents and limits of universality in high-dimensional generalized linear estimationcited by 26
- 2024Asymptotics of Random Feature Regression Beyond the Linear Scaling Regimecited by 26
- 2023Precise Asymptotic Analysis of Deep Random Feature Modelscited by 22
- 2023Learning curves for deep structured Gaussian feature modelscited by 13
- 2022Optimal Activation Functions for the Random Features Regression Modelcited by 4
- 2023Optimal Nonlinearities Improve Generalization Performance of Random Featurescited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2.
2 papers.