# Measuring the Symmetry--Data Exchange Rate

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.01090 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.01090/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 13 of its 25 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 31 May 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 13 of 13)

- [PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.01703/) (2019)
- [Convolutional Neural Networks on Graphs with Fast Localized Spectral Filtering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.09375/) (2016)
- [Geometric Deep Learning: Grids, Groups, Graphs, Geodesics, and Gauges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.13478/) (2021)
- [Group Equivariant Convolutional Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.07576/) (2016)
- [Tensor field networks: Rotation- and translation-equivariant neural networks for 3D point clouds](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.08219/) (2018)
- [E(3)-Equivariant Graph Neural Networks for Data-Efficient and Accurate Interatomic Potentials](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.03164/) (2021)
- [General E(2)-Equivariant Steerable CNNs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.08251/) (2019)
- [On the Generalization of Equivariance and Convolution in Neural Networks to the Action of Compact Groups](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.03690/) (2018)
- [Cormorant: Covariant Molecular Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.04015/) (2019)
- [Estimating the intrinsic dimension of datasets by a minimal neighborhood information](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.06992/) (2018)
- [Provably Strict Generalisation Benefit for Equivariant Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.10333/) (2021)
- [Learning with invariances in random features and kernel models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.13219/) (2021)
- [Scikit-dimension: a Python package for intrinsic dimension estimation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.02596/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Equivariance theory predicts that an architectural symmetry prior reduces sample complexity by a factor of |G|; this is widely cited but rarely measured as a scaling law with controls that separate the prior from its confounds. On a controlled C_n-symmetric task, we report three findings. First, a wrong-group control with identical orbit size and matched compute is worse than no constraint (joint pairwise CI [+0.79, +3.26] excludes zero, robust across estimators); misaligned constraint is actively harmful, not merely unhelpful. Second, an augmentation baseline equipped with test-time orbit averaging matches the equivariant model exactly -- bit-identical per-epoch validation curves across matched cells -- so the architecture-vs-augmentation gap is conditional on asymmetric test-time computation, not unconditional. Third, the relative exchange rate beta_diff = 1.28 is consistent in sign and order of magnitude with the theoretical 1.0 (single-level CI [+0.92, +2.05]); the more conservative two-level bootstrap (seeds x group sizes) widens this to [-0.63, +1.72], including zero, and a finer-N replication on a sqrt(2)-spaced grid is inconclusive (point estimate -0.82). The methodological contributions -- the relative-rate estimator that cancels the shared-difficulty confound, the wrong-group control, and a pre-specified failure taxonomy -- transfer to any inductive bias whose strength can be parameterised. Honest scoping: the primary estimator beta_diff was adopted post-hoc after the initial analysis revealed a positive-slope identifiability problem; the design was never externally pre-registered; and the headline number rests on an OLS slope over seven group sizes on a coarse N grid. This is an exploratory study, not a confirmatory measurement; the wrong-group result is the cleanest finding and the one we report with the most confidence. A registered replication on fresh seeds is future work.