Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Katherine Hermann

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

7 papers
1 author row

Possible papers

7

TMLR Journal 2025 Journal Article

Getting aligned on representational alignment

  • Ilia Sucholutsky
  • Lukas Muttenthaler
  • Adrian Weller
  • Andi Peng
  • Andreea Bobu
  • Been Kim
  • Bradley C. Love
  • Christopher J Cueva

Biological and artificial information processing systems form representations of the world that they can use to categorize, reason, plan, navigate, and make decisions. How can we measure the similarity between the representations formed by these diverse systems? Do similarities in representations then translate into similar behavior? If so, then how can a system's representations be modified to better match those of another system? These questions pertaining to the study of \emph{representational alignment} are at the heart of some of the most promising research areas in contemporary cognitive science, neuroscience, and machine learning. In this Perspective, we survey the exciting recent developments in representational alignment research in the fields of cognitive science, neuroscience, and machine learning. Despite their overlapping interests, there is limited knowledge transfer between these fields, so work in one field ends up duplicated in another, and useful innovations are not shared effectively. To improve communication, we propose a unifying framework that can serve as a common language for research on representational alignment, and map several streams of existing work across fields within our framework. We also lay out open problems in representational alignment where progress can benefit all three of these fields. We hope that this paper will catalyze cross-disciplinary collaboration and accelerate progress for all communities studying and developing information processing systems.

TMLR Journal 2024 Journal Article

Learned feature representations are biased by complexity, learning order, position, and more

  • Andrew Kyle Lampinen
  • Stephanie C.Y. Chan
  • Katherine Hermann

Representation learning, and interpreting learned representations, are key areas of focus in machine learning and neuroscience. Both fields generally use representations as a means to understand or improve a system's computations. In this work, however, we explore surprising dissociations between representation and computation that may pose challenges for such efforts. We create datasets in which we attempt to match the computational role that different features play, while manipulating other properties of the features or the data. We train various deep learning architectures to compute these multiple abstract features about their inputs. We find that their learned feature representations are systematically biased towards representing some features more strongly than others, depending upon extraneous properties such as feature complexity, the order in which features are learned, and the distribution of features over the inputs. For example, features that are simpler to compute or learned first tend to be represented more strongly and densely than features that are more complex or learned later, even if all features are learned equally well. We also explore how these biases are affected by architectures, optimizers, and training regimes (e.g., in transformers, features decoded earlier in the output sequence also tend to be represented more strongly). Our results help to characterize the inductive biases of gradient-based representation learning. We then illustrate the downstream effects of these biases on various commonly-used methods for analyzing or intervening on representations. These results highlight a key challenge for interpretability---or for comparing the representations of models and brains---disentangling extraneous biases from the computationally important aspects of a system's internal representations.

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Understanding Visual Feature Reliance through the Lens of Complexity

  • Thomas Fel
  • Louis Béthune
  • Andrew K. Lampinen
  • Thomas Serre
  • Katherine Hermann

Recent studies suggest that deep learning models' inductive bias towards favoring simpler features may be an origin of shortcut learning. Yet, there has been limited focus on understanding the complexities of the myriad features that models learn. In this work, we introduce a new metric for quantifying feature complexity, based on V-information and capturing whether a feature requires complex computational transformations to be extracted. Using this V-information metric, we analyze the complexities of 10, 000 features—represented as directions in the penultimate layer—that were extracted from a standard ImageNet-trained vision model. Our study addresses four key questions: First, we ask what features look like as a function of complexity, and find a spectrum of simple-to-complex features present within the model. Second, we ask when features are learned during training. We find that simpler features dominate early in training, and more complex features emerge gradually. Third, we investigate where within the network simple and complex features "flow, " and find that simpler features tend to bypass the visual hierarchy via residual connections. Fourth, we explore the connection between features' complexity and their importance for driving the network's decision. We find that complex features tend to be less important. Surprisingly, important features become accessible at earlier layers during training, like a "sedimentation process, " allowing the model to build upon these foundational elements.

NeurIPS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

Improving neural network representations using human similarity judgments

  • Lukas Muttenthaler
  • Lorenz Linhardt
  • Jonas Dippel
  • Robert A. Vandermeulen
  • Katherine Hermann
  • Andrew Lampinen
  • Simon Kornblith

Deep neural networks have reached human-level performance on many computer vision tasks. However, the objectives used to train these networks enforce only that similar images are embedded at similar locations in the representation space, and do not directly constrain the global structure of the resulting space. Here, we explore the impact of supervising this global structure by linearly aligning it with human similarity judgments. We find that a naive approach leads to large changes in local representational structure that harm downstream performance. Thus, we propose a novel method that aligns the global structure of representations while preserving their local structure. This global-local transform considerably improves accuracy across a variety of few-shot learning and anomaly detection tasks. Our results indicate that human visual representations are globally organized in a way that facilitates learning from few examples, and incorporating this global structure into neural network representations improves performance on downstream tasks.

NeurIPS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback

  • Aman Madaan
  • Niket Tandon
  • Prakhar Gupta
  • Skyler Hallinan
  • Luyu Gao
  • Sarah Wiegreffe
  • Uri Alon
  • Nouha Dziri

Like humans, large language models (LLMs) do not always generate the best output on their first try. Motivated by how humans refine their written text, we introduce Self-Refine, an approach for improving initial outputs from LLMs through iterative feedback and refinement. The main idea is to generate an initial output using an LLMs; then, the same LLMs provides *feedback* for its output and uses it to *refine* itself, iteratively. Self-Refine does not require any supervised training data, additional training, or reinforcement learning, and instead uses a single LLM as the generator, refiner and the feedback provider. We evaluate Self-Refine across 7 diverse tasks, ranging from dialog response generation to mathematical reasoning, using state-of-the-art (GPT-3. 5, ChatGPT, and GPT-4) LLMs. Across all evaluated tasks, outputs generated with Self-Refine are preferred by humans and automatic metrics over those generated with the same LLM using conventional one-step generation, improving by $\sim$20\% absolute on average in task performance. Our work demonstrates that even state-of-the-art LLMs like GPT-4 can be further improved at test-time using our simple, standalone approach.

NeurIPS Conference 2020 Conference Paper

The Origins and Prevalence of Texture Bias in Convolutional Neural Networks

  • Katherine Hermann
  • Ting Chen
  • Simon Kornblith

Recent work has indicated that, unlike humans, ImageNet-trained CNNs tend to classify images by texture rather than by shape. How pervasive is this bias, and where does it come from? We find that, when trained on datasets of images with conflicting shape and texture, CNNs learn to classify by shape at least as easily as by texture. What factors, then, produce the texture bias in CNNs trained on ImageNet? Different unsupervised training objectives and different architectures have small but significant and largely independent effects on the level of texture bias. However, all objectives and architectures still lead to models that make texture-based classification decisions a majority of the time, even if shape information is decodable from their hidden representations. The effect of data augmentation is much larger. By taking less aggressive random crops at training time and applying simple, naturalistic augmentation (color distortion, noise, and blur), we train models that classify ambiguous images by shape a majority of the time, and outperform baselines on out-of-distribution test sets. Our results indicate that apparent differences in the way humans and ImageNet-trained CNNs process images may arise not primarily from differences in their internal workings, but from differences in the data that they see.

NeurIPS Conference 2020 Conference Paper

What shapes feature representations? Exploring datasets, architectures, and training

  • Katherine Hermann
  • Andrew Lampinen

In naturalistic learning problems, a model's input contains a wide range of features, some useful for the task at hand, and others not. Of the useful features, which ones does the model use? Of the task-irrelevant features, which ones does the model represent? Answers to these questions are important for understanding the basis of models' decisions, as well as for building models that learn versatile, adaptable representations useful beyond the original training task. We study these questions using synthetic datasets in which the task-relevance of input features can be controlled directly. We find that when two features redundantly predict the labels, the model preferentially represents one, and its preference reflects what was most linearly decodable from the untrained model. Over training, task-relevant features are enhanced, and task-irrelevant features are partially suppressed. Interestingly, in some cases, an easier, weakly predictive feature can suppress a more strongly predictive, but more difficult one. Additionally, models trained to recognize both easy and hard features learn representations most similar to models that use only the easy feature. Further, easy features lead to more consistent representations across model runs than do hard features. Finally, models have greater representational similarity to an untrained model than to models trained on a different task. Our results highlight the complex processes that determine which features a model represents.

v2026.09.13