#01Nov 10, 2026
cs.SD
Exploring Post-Hoc Disentanglement of Audio Foundation Models for Music Similarity
Lucas de Souza Brandão, Gabriel da Costa Merlin, Diego Furtado Silva
Audio foundation models like CLAP, MuQ, and MERT excel at capturing general musical similarity. On the other hand, their entangled latent spaces limit interpretability and fine-grained attribute control. Conditional Similarity Networks (CSN) address this by pairing a backbone representation model with learned masks that gate the embedding space into attribute-specific subspaces. However, existing methods train the backbone from scratch, rather than leveraging pretrained foundation models. We instead present a systematic study of post-hoc disentanglement, adapting CSN to gate frozen pretrained embeddings. We evaluate adding trainable parameters to adapt the embedding under different masking and pooling regimes across two datasets. Our findings show that minimal adaptation capacity is sufficient for post-hoc gating to improve both attribute-specific disentanglement and overall retrieval performance, while pooling, masking, and depth choices yield limited additional gains.
#02Nov 10, 2026
stat.ML
A Theory of Cross-Validation Variance
Nathaniel S. O'Connell, Jaime L. Speiser
Cross-validation estimates predictive performance by repeatedly splitting the data into training and validation sets, fitting the model on the first and evaluating it on the second. Every observation influences the estimate in two roles, through its own evaluation when it is held out and through the models it helps fit when it trains. The random splits determine its weight in each role. From this representation, we prove an exact finite-sample identity for the variance of the cross-validated estimate. For a given splitting scheme with a common training set size, the variance is a function of these weights, with constants of the model, the metric, and the population. It covers metrics averaged over observations, such as mean squared error, and over case--control pairs, such as the AUC. The identity shows which schemes to use. The variance decomposes into sampling variance, which depends only on the training size, and variance due to the random fold splitting, which arises when the weights change from one draw of the splits to the next. K-fold cross-validation, whose weights are equal across observations by design, is therefore variance optimal at first order; Monte Carlo and bootstrap cross-validation are not. The first-order variance of K-fold does not depend on K, and under reasonable conditions on the model leave-one-out has the smallest variance of any K-fold scheme. For the AUC the same holds for leave-pair-out, which evaluates every case--control pair. Finally, we show the cross-validated estimate is asymptotically normal with the identity's full variance. Together, these results provide a general theoretical foundation for inference on cross-validated performance and establish principles for selecting variance-optimal cross-validation designs.
#03Nov 10, 2026
cs.AI
Bits or permutations? Spending a fixed inference budget on weight precision or on option-order averaging in small local language models
Mohammed Nayeem Khan, Logesh L, Aliyas Ahmad Misri
Local language models can save memory by storing weights in fewer bits, and they can reduce sensitivity to the order of answer options by averaging a few reorderings. We ask whether the first makes the second worse, and which is the cheaper way to spend a fixed budget. On Qwen3-0.6B and Qwen3-1.7B with simulated round-to-nearest weight quantization (8, 6, 4 and 3 bits, fp16 reference), read from the logits of the letters A to D on ARC-Easy, ARC-Challenge, MMLU and HellaSwag (300 items each), 6 bits lose no accuracy against fp16 (they score +1.8 (+1.0 to +2.5) and +0.9 (+0.3 to +1.5) points higher, which we do not explain), and 8 bits change it by -0.7 (-1.1 to -0.3) and -0.4 (-0.7 to -0.2) points. At 4 bits the answer-slot skew rises from 0.15 to 0.53 (0.6B) and from 0.07 to 0.12 (1.7B); Gaussian noise at the same weight SNR gives 0.15 and 0.37 (two draws) and 0.19 (one draw), so the control is inconclusive on whether rounding adds slot skew beyond equal-power noise. Flip rates rise but stay below an accuracy-matched baseline of independent uniform errors. Averaging four cyclic orders recovers +12.6 points at 4 bits for 0.6B (+5.3 at fp16). We price bits and passes in one machine-independent unit, weight bytes read times passes. In cost-matched pairs, extra orders beat extra bits only when the weights have 6 or more bits, and the decision table reduces to: use 6-bit weights and spend the rest of the budget on up to four orders, one pass each. Everything is simulated on two small models with the simplest quantizer; a title-level search found no earlier study of quantization together with option order.
#04Nov 10, 2026
cs.LG
Quantifying the Sampling Frequency Invariance of Time-Series Foundation Models for Sensor Data Applications
Sourish Gunesh Dhekane, Abinaya Kumar, Torsten Woertwein and 3 more
Time-Series Foundation Models (TSFMs) are increasingly used in sensor applications, where sampling frequency (SF) varies across sensors, devices, and operating modes (e.g., power saving). Ideally, TSFMs must remain effective during such SF changes, provided the SF retains task-critical bandwidth. In this paper, we stress-test 4 prominent TSFMs: MOMENT, Chronos-2, Moirai-MoE, and TimesFM, to quantify their SF-invariance and investigate whether their behavior tracks the resulting loss of information bandwidth rather than the SF value itself. Our stress-test probes 3 dimensions: (i) the shift in embeddings, (ii) the degradation in forecasting performance, and (iii) the degradation in downstream performance, quantified by three novel metrics: FSI, FDI, and CDI, respectively. To our knowledge, this is the first study to place SF-invariance at the core of TSFM evaluations. Our results characterize: (i) how SF-invariance depends on the margin between signal's native-SF and the bandwidth its task requires, (ii) how much of that invariance the choice of TSFM explains, and (iii) how much of TSFM's performance degradation under a lower SF reflects information loss rather than a limitation of their abilities. These findings reframe SF-invariance as a measurable, signal-aware property of the (signal X TSFM) pair, and guide practitioners on when TSFMs display SF-invariance.
#05Nov 10, 2026
cs.LG
A Theory of Policy Optimization in Post-Training: Coverage Collapse and Reference Resets
Audrey Huang, Nan Jiang, Sham M. Kakade and 3 more
Policy optimization is central to language model post-training, yet principled guidance remains limited. We revisit its theoretical foundations to identify algorithms that learn near-optimal policies using total samples and gradient steps governed by the base model's response coverage, a measure of how readily it generates optimal responses. We call such algorithms coverage-preserving. This guarantee captures the goal of amplifying capabilities accessible through sampling from the base model. (1) Coverage collapse. REINFORCE, the basis for PPO and GRPO, can drive the probability of optimal responses to near zero, even as reward improves. This coverage collapse stalls optimization, and convergence can require exponentially many steps despite good initial coverage. The failure arises even with exact gradients and persists under KL regularization to the base model. (2) Reference resets. We show that repeatedly resetting the KL reference to the most recent policy mitigates coverage collapse. We formalize this intervention in Approximate Policy Mirror Descent (APMD), a meta-algorithm that approximately solves a sequence of KL-regularized RL subproblems. APMD enables stronger regularization, making each subproblem easier to solve, while reference resets allow convergence to global optimality. (3) Coverage-preserving algorithms. For softmax linear policies over pretrained features, we use APMD to establish the first global convergence guarantees showing that widely used families of post-training algorithms are coverage-preserving. These include stylized PPO and GRPO variants with explicit KL regularization and reference resets, and squared-loss algorithms that implement them implicitly, including those used to train the Kimi models. These results clarify how regularization, clipping, and objective choice affect the sampling and optimization costs of post-training.