Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Hiroyasu Usami

Publications and source records attributed to Hiroyasu Usami.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

Conditional stopping guarantees for a folded parametrization of reduced Stokes vectors

Stopping decisions made in parametrization coordinates need not certify physically accurate estimates. We establish conditional stopping guarantees for a folded parametrization of reduced Stokes vectors, including partial linear polarization. For strongly convex physical objectives on the bounded-intensity inner sheet, normalized first derivatives and one radial lower-curvature test give an explicit objective-gap bound with sharp tolerance orders $\varepsilon^{4/3}+ν^2$. The guarantee requires neither prior localization near an optimum nor a positive-semidefinite head Hessian. Its information basis is an exact recovery identity: one signed radial curvature restores the physical-gradient component lost at the fully linearly polarized fold, without stationarity or knowledge of the physical Hessian. For a nominal quadratic model, an outward-rounded implementation certifies a gap of at most $10^{-6}$ for 8,861 of 9,284 stored endpoints; it rejects all 295 historical false successes and 128 accurate endpoints. The full 128-fractional-bit pass takes 7.32 seconds and includes 52 scalar curvature evaluations. Controlled fits and released observations distinguish stopping certification from local fold diagnosis and subsequent coordinate repair. Twenty shared-network fits contain no saved near-fold negative-curvature candidates, and direct physical solvers are cheaper on the tested quadratics.

physics.optics↗

Exact Fusion of Softmax Attention Heads Can Require Exponentially Many Atoms

Fusing independently normalized attention heads can increase the number of explicit key-value entries, or atoms, needed to preserve their output. We prove a sharp separation for $W_d(q)=\sum_{j=1}^dσ(q_j)$: its $d$ two-atom heads use $2d$ head-atom terms, whereas its minimum single-head representation has exactly $2^d$ atoms, even with arbitrary fixed replacement keys, scalar values, and positive masses. The same lower bound holds for every fixed uniform error below $1/2$ on $\mathbb R^d$, and the threshold is sharp. The proof uses exposed-key normal cones; exact equality on any nonempty open query domain inherits the bound. The resulting atom bound for a fixed head count is tight when that count divides $d$. A normalized family retains its exponential exact minimum while approaching a constant on fixed-radius query balls. For pretrained-model caches, a classical affine-rank bound and a certified instance exclude exact vector preservation at a specified atom count. Learned-cache comparisons on two disjoint banks of 64 contexts show budget-dependent reversals and calibration effects.

cs.LG↗

Invertible Graph Aggregation Can Increase ReLU Readout Width

An invertible graph aggregation preserves the complete feature table, but can increase the size of a classifier that reads one node at a time. For every even $N\ge4$, we construct a labeled tree with $2N$ vertices and maximum degree three. A shared one-hidden-layer rectified linear unit (ReLU) classifier needs one hidden unit on the raw scalar features and exactly $N$ units after one lazy neighborhood mean. All aggregate values are distinct, and the mixing matrix has condition number at most 8. We determine the complete error curve for heads with a free affine term. The width separation persists under scalar perturbations. Under a specified bounded uniform-noise model with one nuisance coordinate, every one-unit aggregate head has expected error at least $1/12$, while a fixed $N$-unit head has zero error. Controlled fits compare trained heads with these explicit feasible scores. On Roman-empire and Tolokers, aggregation improves fitted prediction, and retaining raw features helps at the largest tested parameter budget. Training-only diagnostics include conditional output-layer optimality bounds for eight fixed runs.

cs.LG↗

The Cost of Missed States: Online Tracking with Current-Observation Resets

An online tracker retains one state and may reset only to the current observation, although its complete observed history is available. Offline knows the future and obeys the same reset rule. Under a hard discrepancy radius, for every horizon $T\ge5$ and every feasible randomized causal policy, a fixed path on a known five-point metric requires at least $(T+1)/2$ expected refreshes, against exactly two offline refreshes with a strict radius margin. Missing the useful prefix center forces a refresh at every suffix observation. The path visits four values, with resolution fixed as $T$ grows. Write $J_λ$ for cumulative discrepancy plus a charge $λ>0$ per refresh, and $V_T$ for the sum of successive observation distances. A candidate prefix adapts Bienkowski and Schmid's randomized lower bound to this objective under current resets, even with a known horizon and $V_T<3λ$. This construction needs finer grids; a fixed finite metric with positive minimum separation instead admits a competitive policy for penalized tracking. An anytime policy satisfies $J_λ\leλ+4\sqrt{λTV_T}$ without knowing the horizon or final variation. Clipping for a known horizon gives $J_λ\leλT$ and a factor-three comparison with the minimum of three analytical bounds, without knowing final variation. Current-value diameter and readout sensitivity give same-input output bounds for mixtures, including squared-distance softmax.

cs.DS↗

From Candidate Admission to Task-Level Return: Auditing LLM-Generated Code under Execution Contracts

Admission rules retain generated programs, whereas selection policies return one candidate per task. We audit how these decisions interact with execution contracts in two separately frozen, disjoint HumanEvalPlus cohorts, each comprising 32 tasks, four samples per task per profile and two served profiles. Under the inline execution contract, a structural-and-self-test screen admits 4-9 expanded-suite nonpasses per 80-107 admissions and excludes 14-43 suite passes per 128 planned attempts. A restricted module-supply condition adds 20 and 14 passing admissions for one profile in the respective cohorts, plus one follow-up nonpass, and reduces the excluded suite passes to 14-23. All fixed first-admitted outcomes and abstentions remain unchanged. In the original pool, the added passes enter already all-passing admitted pools; in the follow-up, four of 24 common sample orders lose one passed task. Selected-subset diagnostics separately address registration-sensitive completion and reference-relative assertion disagreement, accounting for input domains and comparator tolerances. In these high-pass pools, candidate retention and task-level return diverge and are reported separately. Results are conditional on the saved pools, contracts and pinned suites; downstream training effects are unmeasured.

cs.SE↗

LLM Judges Have Dark Current: Stratified Null and Utility Tests for LLM Judge Reliability

Passing an exact-clone null gate does not entail passing a matched target-selection utility gate. We call a non-tie preference between exact duplicates dark current. On 102 prespecified fresh RewardBench 2 rows, all four configuration--criterion cells report 0/102 clone preferences. Both neutral utility arms pass, but strict utility lower bounds of .539 and .745 miss the .75 working threshold. Conversely, re-evaluation of the same rows on two additional configurations yields a neutral gpt-oss utility pass with 2/102 clone preferences, leaving low-null behavior uncertified. A separately frozen 485-row extension passes both aggregate working gates under both criteria on one local raw-text configuration, yet strict Precise Instruction Following (Precise IF) alignment is 58/154 (.377). Thus matched null and utility results can diverge, and aggregate passage can coexist with weak subset alignment. Interpretation is conditional on the declared configurations, fixed source mixtures, source-label targets, and study-specific working models. The bounds are marginal, the subset rate is descriptive, and non-certification does not prove a defect.

cs.CL↗