# On the Learnability of Knot Invariants: Representation, Predictability, and Neural Similarity

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.12243 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12243/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 17 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Feb 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1512.03385/) (2015)
- [Learning to Unknot](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.16263/) (2020)
- [Searching for ribbons with machine learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.09304/) (2023)
- [Rigor with Machine Learning from Field Theory to the Poincar'e Conjecture](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.13321/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We analyze different aspects of neural network predictions of knot invariants. First, we investigate the impact of different knot representations on the prediction of invariants and find that braid representations work in general the best. Second, we study which knot invariants are easy to learn, with invariants derived from hyperbolic geometry and knot diagrams being very easy to learn, while invariants derived from topological or homological data are harder. Predicting the Arf invariant could not be learned for any representation. Third, we propose a cosine similarity score based on gradient saliency vectors, and a joint misclassification score to uncover similarities in neural networks trained to predict related topological invariants.