Directional Neural Collapse Explains Few-Shot Transfer in Self-Supervised Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Frozen self-supervised representations often transfer well with only a few labels across many semantic tasks. We argue that a single geometric quantity, directional CDNV (decision-axis variance), sits at the core of two favorable behaviors: strong few-shot transfer within a task, and low interference across many tasks. We show that both emerge when variability along class-separating directions is small. First, we prove sharp non-asymptotic multiclass generalization bounds for downstream classification whose leading term is the directional CDNV. The bounds include finite-shot corrections that cleanly separate intrinsic decision-axis variability from centroid-estimation error. Second, we link decision-axis collapse to multitask geometry: for independent balanced labelings, small directional CDNV across tasks forces the corresponding decision axes to be nearly orthogonal, helping a single representation support many tasks with minimal interference. Empirically, across SSL objectives, directional CDNV collapses during pretraining even when classical CDNV remains large, and our bounds closely track few-shot error at practical shot sizes. Additionally, on synthetic multitask data, we verify that SSL learns representations whose induced decision axes are nearly orthogonal. The code and project page of the paper are available at [hrefhttps://dlfundamentals.github.io/directional-neural-collapse/project page].
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 57 of its 68 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Mar 2026.
Builds on
57 of 68 references.
References · 57
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
- 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 29,915
- 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 11,979
- 2021Masked Autoencoders Are Scalable Vision Learnerscited by 7,339
- 2021Emerging Properties in Self-Supervised Vision Transformerscited by 6,893
- 2016SGDR: Stochastic Gradient Descent with Warm Restartscited by 4,993
- 2023Sigmoid Loss for Language Image Pre-Trainingcited by 3,048
- 2016Matching Networks for One Shot Learningcited by 2,246
- 2021Barlow Twins: Self-Supervised Learning via Redundancy Reductioncited by 1,818
- 2017Accurate, Large Minibatch SGD: Training ImageNet in 1 Hourcited by 1,479
- 2020Understanding Contrastive Representation Learning through Alignment and Uniformity on the Hyperspherecited by 1,393
38 more
- 2021iBOT: Image BERT Pre-Training with Online Tokenizercited by 891
- 2020What Makes for Good Views for Contrastive Learning?cited by 843
- 2019Learning Representations by Maximizing Mutual Information Across Viewscited by 733
- 2020Prevalence of Neural Collapse during the terminal phase of deep learning trainingcited by 713
- 2019A Theoretical Analysis of Contrastive Unsupervised Representation Learningcited by 530
- 2017Large Batch Training of Convolutional Networkscited by 529
- 2020Understanding the Behaviour of Contrastive Losscited by 397
- 2019On Mutual Information Maximization for Representation Learningcited by 315
- 2021Provable Guarantees for Self-Supervised Deep Learning with Spectral Contrastive Losscited by 311
- 2021Contrastive Learning Inverts the Data Generating Processcited by 220
- 2018Formal Limitations on the Measurement of Mutual Informationcited by 189
- 2020Theoretical Analysis of Self-Training with Deep Networks on Unlabeled Datacited by 179
- 2021Neural Collapse Under MSE Loss: Proximity to and Dynamics on the Central Pathcited by 156
- 2020Contrastive learning, multi-view redundancy, and linear modelscited by 146
- 2022Contrastive and Non-Contrastive Self-Supervised Learning Recover Global and Local Spectral Embedding Methodscited by 146
- 2021Decoupled Contrastive Learningcited by 141
- 2020Intriguing Properties of Contrastive Lossescited by 129
- 2021Toward Understanding the Feature Learning Process of Self-supervised Contrastive Learningcited by 119
- 2022On the duality between contrastive and non-contrastive self-supervised learningcited by 107
- 2022Chaos is a Ladder: A New Theoretical Understanding of Contrastive Learning via Augmentation Overlapcited by 105
- 2021On the Role of Neural Collapse in Transfer Learningcited by 100
- 2022Understanding Contrastive Learning Requires Incorporating Inductive Biasescited by 96
- 2022Are All Losses Created Equal: A Neural Collapse Perspectivecited by 78
- 2022Connect, Not Collapse: Explaining Contrastive Learning for Unsupervised Domain Adaptationcited by 66
- 2021Investigating the Role of Negatives in Contrastive Representation Learningcited by 54
- 2021The Power of Contrast for Feature Learning: A Theoretical Analysiscited by 53
- 2020Unraveling Meta-Learning: Understanding Feature Representations for Few-Shot Taskscited by 47
- 2021Understanding Negative Samples in Instance Discriminative Self-supervised Representation Learningcited by 47
- 2022Beyond Separability: Analyzing the Linear Transferability of Contrastive Representations to Related Subpopulationscited by 44
- 2022Provable Stochastic Optimization for Global Contrastive Learning: Small Batch Does Not Harm Performancecited by 40
- 2022Do More Negative Samples Necessarily Hurt in Contrastive Learning?cited by 39
- 2022A Theoretical Study of Inductive Biases in Contrastive Learningcited by 38
- 2023InfoNCE Loss Provably Learns Cluster-Preserving Representationscited by 37
- 2022Understanding Deep Contrastive Learning via Coordinate-wise Optimizationcited by 35
- 2023Reverse Engineering Self-Supervised Learningcited by 33
- 2021On the Surrogate Gap between Contrastive and Supervised Lossescited by 25
- 2024Investigating the Benefits of Projection Head for Representation Learningcited by 20
- 2022Understanding the Role of Nonlinearity in Training Dynamics of Contrastive Learningcited by 19
50 most cited of 57 All 57 (JSON)
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.