Sharp Regret Bounds and a Task-Covariance Correction for Spectral Representation Learning
TL;DR
This work derives alignment-dependent regret bounds, matching worst-case lower bounds for a flat leading spectrum, and bounds using the leading $2k$ directions with a spectral-tail term, and bound the imbalance from random preference patterns and from averaging independent tasks with an isotropic population covariance.
Abstract
Spectral features can remain optimal under strongly uneven task preferences when they retain the directions most useful to the tasks. In a local-task model, expected probing gain depends on the task prior only through its covariance $\Lambda$: with $B$ recording dependence between views, $k$ spectral features span the leading eigenspace of $BB^\top$, while task-optimal features span that of $B\Lambda B^\top$. We derive alignment-dependent regret bounds, matching worst-case lower bounds for a flat leading spectrum, and bounds using the leading $2k$ directions with a spectral-tail term; a spectral gap makes the bound quadratic in small anisotropy. We also bound the imbalance from random preference patterns and from averaging independent tasks with an isotropic population covariance. With known $\Lambda$, changing one term of the spectral contrastive loss selects task-optimal features; with a labelled task bank, we propose a diagnostic and test correction without retraining. Correction reduces synthetic held-out regret from $0.858$ to $0.003$ with $2000$ tasks when less task-relevant directions dominate, and on CIFAR-100 lowers empirical regret by $0.031$--$0.053$ on held-out fine-label tasks using the same images. With a small task bank, however, correction can hurt.