Catastrophic Compositional Generation: Why Vanilla Diffusion Models Fail to Extrapolate

The task of compositional generation involves using a conditional generative model, trained only on a subset of the possible conditions, to produce samples from compositionally-defined target distributions such as a geometric combination of the source distributions. In this work, we argue that this task is often infeasible for vanilla conditional diffusion models: we conjecture that no inference-time technique can efficiently produce samples from the target distribution in certain well-motivated settings. This idea is supported by theory-guided generalization arguments and carefully-designed experiments on both synthetic and realistic data. In particular, while recent methods such as Feynman-Kac correction reduce inference-time approximation error, our results show that score estimation error has a more catastrophic effect on performance when the target distribution is out-of-distribution with respect to the sources, highlighting the need for a different approach to this task.

Concept Modulation Models: A Unified Framework for Identifiability and Extrapolation

Reliable generalization in conditional latent variable models requires understanding both identifiability and extrapolation: how observed variation across attributes determines latent structure, and how that structure determines distributions at unseen attributes. However, existing identifiability and extrapolation guarantees are largely model-specific, with separate analyses in nonlinear ICA, causal representation learning, perturbation modeling, and related conditional latent variable models. We introduce concept modulation models (CMMs), an attribute-indexed class of conditional generative models with structure $A\to Λ\to C\to X$, where attributes select modulators, modulators induce latent concept laws, and concepts generate observed features. CMMs lift transition-based identifiability to conditional settings by showing that feature agreement on observed attributes induces a latent concept transition constrained by the CMM class. We express these constraints through attribute potentials, log-density ratios between attribute-conditioned concept laws, separating the generic lifting step from model-specific rigidity arguments. The same potentials control extrapolation: agreement at unseen attributes holds exactly when the transported attribute-potential identities extend to those attributes. This yields algebraic extrapolation criteria, identifies the common potential-based proof objects behind several existing identifiability and extrapolation results, and, when combined with the model-specific rigidity arguments in those works, recovers their stated conclusions.

Reward Learning from Best-of-$N$ Preference Data: Targets, Tradeoffs, and Design Principles

Best-of-$N$ sampling is widely used to construct pairwise preference data: $N$ candidates are drawn from a base distribution, and the best is paired with a rejected response. Despite its widespread use, what Bradley--Terry (BT) reward learning extracts from such data, and how to choose $N$ and the base distribution, remain unclear. We specialize a recent analysis of preference data via its induced conditional distribution to Best-of-$N$. For independent-reference variants, we derive closed-form reward targets as explicit functions of $N$ and the base distribution, and show that they preserve the latent reward ranking. For the practical Best-vs-Random and Best-vs-Worst variants, chosen and rejected responses are coupled through the same candidate set, so exact BT representability generally fails; nevertheless, bounded-class minimizers approach the reference targets as $N$ grows. Although margin and connectivity are known to govern sample efficiency in pairwise preference learning, Best-of-$N$ couples them through $N$ in opposing directions: larger $N$ widens pairwise margins but reduces connectivity. This trade-off yields two design principles: use larger $N$ when preference labels are the bottleneck, smaller $N$ when generation is the bottleneck; and shape the base distribution to place mass between the responses whose comparison matters most at test time. Experiments on synthetic and real preference data support the predicted dependence on sample size and base-distribution shape.

A Unifying Framework for Unsupervised Concept Extraction

Techniques for concept extraction, such as sparse autoencoders and transcoders, aim to extract high-level symbolic concepts from low-level nonsymbolic representations. When these extracted concepts are used for downstream tasks such as model steering and unlearning, it is essential to understand their guarantees, or lack thereof. In this work, we present a unified theoretical framework for unsupervised concept extraction, in which we frame the task of concept extraction as identifying a generative model. We present a general meta-theorem for identifiability, which reduces the problem of establishing identifiability guarantees to the problem of characterizing the intersection of two sets. As we demonstrate on a range of widely-used approaches, this meta-theorem substantially simplifies the task of proving such guarantees, thus paving the way for the development of new, principled approaches for concept extraction.

What Does Preference Learning Recover from Pairwise Comparison Data?

Pairwise preference learning is central to machine learning, with recent applications in aligning language models with human preferences. A typical dataset consists of triplets $(x, y^+, y^-)$, where response $y^+$ is preferred over response $y^-$ for context $x$. The Bradley--Terry (BT) model is the predominant approach, modeling preference probabilities as a function of latent score differences. Standard practice assumes data follows this model and learns the latent scores accordingly. However, real data may violate this assumption, and it remains unclear what BT learning recovers in such cases. Starting from triplet comparison data, we formalize the preference information it encodes through the conditional preference distribution (CPRD). We give precise conditions for when BT is appropriate for modeling the CPRD, and identify factors governing sample efficiency -- namely, margin and connectivity. Together, these results offer a data-centric foundation for understanding what preference learning actually recovers.

Contextures: Representations from Contexts

Despite the empirical success of foundation models, we do not have a systematic characterization of the representations that these models learn. In this paper, we establish the contexture theory. It shows that a large class of representation learning methods can be characterized as learning from the association between the input and a context variable. Specifically, we show that many popular methods aim to approximate the top-d singular functions of the expectation operator induced by the context, in which case we say that the representation learns the contexture. We demonstrate the generality of the contexture theory by proving that representation learning within various learning paradigms -- supervised, self-supervised, and manifold learning -- can all be studied from such a perspective. We also prove that the representations that learn the contexture are optimal on those tasks that are compatible with the context. One important implication of the contexture theory is that once the model is large enough to approximate the top singular functions, further scaling up the model size yields diminishing returns. Therefore, scaling is not all we need, and further improvement requires better contexts. To this end, we study how to evaluate the usefulness of a context without knowing the downstream tasks. We propose a metric and show by experiments that it correlates well with the actual performance of the encoder on many real datasets.

Identifying General Mechanism Shifts in Linear Causal Representations

We consider the linear causal representation learning setting where we observe a linear mixing of $d$ unknown latent factors, which follow a linear structural causal model. Recent work has shown that it is possible to recover the latent factors as well as the underlying structural causal model over them, up to permutation and scaling, provided that we have at least $d$ environments, each of which corresponds to perfect interventions on a single latent node (factor). After this powerful result, a key open problem faced by the community has been to relax these conditions: allow for coarser than perfect single-node interventions, and allow for fewer than $d$ of them, since the number of latent factors $d$ could be very large. In this work, we consider precisely such a setting, where we allow a smaller than $d$ number of environments, and also allow for very coarse interventions that can very coarsely \textit{change the entire causal graph over the latent factors}. On the flip side, we relax what we wish to extract to simply the \textit{list of nodes that have shifted between one or more environments}. We provide a surprising identifiability result that it is indeed possible, under some very mild standard assumptions, to identify the set of shifted nodes. Our identifiability proof moreover is a constructive one: we explicitly provide necessary and sufficient conditions for a node to be a shifted node, and show that we can check these conditions given observed data. Our algorithm lends itself very naturally to the sample setting where instead of just interventional distributions, we are provided datasets of samples from each of these distributions. We corroborate our results on both synthetic experiments as well as an interesting psychometric dataset. The code can be found at https://github.com/TianyuCodings/iLCS.

Likelihood-based Differentiable Structure Learning

Existing approaches to differentiable structure learning of directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) rely on strong identifiability assumptions in order to guarantee that global minimizers of the acyclicity-constrained optimization problem identifies the true DAG. Moreover, it has been observed empirically that the optimizer may exploit undesirable artifacts in the loss function. We explain and remedy these issues by studying the behavior of differentiable acyclicity-constrained programs under general likelihoods with multiple global minimizers. By carefully regularizing the likelihood, it is possible to identify the sparsest model in the Markov equivalence class, even in the absence of an identifiable parametrization. We first study the Gaussian case in detail, showing how proper regularization of the likelihood defines a score that identifies the sparsest model. Assuming faithfulness, it also recovers the Markov equivalence class. These results are then generalized to general models and likelihoods, where the same claims hold. These theoretical results are validated empirically, showing how this can be done using standard gradient-based optimizers, thus paving the way for differentiable structure learning under general models and losses.

LLM-Select: Feature Selection with Large Language Models

In this paper, we demonstrate a surprising capability of large language models (LLMs): given only input feature names and a description of a prediction task, they are capable of selecting the most predictive features, with performance rivaling the standard tools of data science. Remarkably, these models exhibit this capacity across various query mechanisms. For example, we zero-shot prompt an LLM to output a numerical importance score for a feature (e.g., "blood pressure") in predicting an outcome of interest (e.g., "heart failure"), with no additional context. In particular, we find that the latest models, such as GPT-4, can consistently identify the most predictive features regardless of the query mechanism and across various prompting strategies. We illustrate these findings through extensive experiments on real-world data, where we show that LLM-based feature selection consistently achieves strong performance competitive with data-driven methods such as the LASSO, despite never having looked at the downstream training data. Our findings suggest that LLMs may be useful not only for selecting the best features for training but also for deciding which features to collect in the first place. This could potentially benefit practitioners in domains like healthcare, where collecting high-quality data comes at a high cost.

Do LLMs dream of elephants (when told not to)? Latent concept association and associative memory in transformers

Large Language Models (LLMs) have the capacity to store and recall facts. Through experimentation with open-source models, we observe that this ability to retrieve facts can be easily manipulated by changing contexts, even without altering their factual meanings. These findings highlight that LLMs might behave like an associative memory model where certain tokens in the contexts serve as clues to retrieving facts. We mathematically explore this property by studying how transformers, the building blocks of LLMs, can complete such memory tasks. We study a simple latent concept association problem with a one-layer transformer and we show theoretically and empirically that the transformer gathers information using self-attention and uses the value matrix for associative memory.