Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

VC bounds for a fixed ReLU architecture

Statement

Fix a scalar-output ReLU feedforward architecture on [0,1]d, permitting skip edges, with W≥1 scalar connection coefficients and unit biases, and depth at most L. Fix a real threshold a. For its realizations fθ, let Ha={{x:fθ(x)>a}:θ∈RW}. There is an absolute constant C such that VC⁡(Ha)≤CW2 and VC⁡(Ha)≤CWLlog⁡(2W). In particular, for W≥2 the bound VC⁡(Ha)≤CL2Wlog⁡W holds. The same assertions hold for fθ(x)≥a. The parameter count includes every hidden and output bias, even when its chosen value is zero.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A fixed architecture with scalar output, W counted coefficients and biases, depth at most L, and a fixed threshold a.

[F1]

Each hidden unit applies max⁡(0,z) to an affine combination of earlier values, and the output is affine; skip edges are permitted and each unit bias counts as a weight (ReLU feedforward networks and complexity conventions).

[F2]

For M real polynomials of total degree at most q in w variables, the number of binary vectors of strict positivity, or of nonnegativity, is at most (2Mq+1)w, also on an arbitrary subset of the parameter space (An elementary polynomial sign-pattern bound).

[F3]

Shattering a finite set means realizing all its subsets; every subset of a shattered set is shattered (Shattering, VC dimension, and first-unshattered index for set classes).

Proof

1.1F1F3construct

Remove all hidden units that have no path to the output. Also remove all hidden units having no input ancestor: for each fixed parameter assignment their values are constants in x, and their contributions to a remaining unit or the output can be added to its existing bias. Allowing these new biases to vary independently produces a fixed reduced architecture whose realization class contains the original class. No new coefficient slots are needed, because every surviving computation unit already has a bias; edges and removed units only disappear. If the output has no input ancestor, the original class consists of constant functions and has VC dimension at most 1, which satisfies the conclusions. Otherwise the reduced graph has w≤W counted slots, U hidden units, and U+1≤w because the output and every hidden unit have counted biases. Every remaining unit lies on an input-to-output path. Rank each hidden unit by the maximum number of computation units on an input-to-that-unit path, and give the output its analogous rank K. Then each edge increases rank, and K≤L−1 and K≤U+1≤w. Empty ranks can be omitted. It suffices to bound the reduced class.

2.1F1step 1.1constructalgebra

Fix arbitrary sample points x1,…,xm. For any prescribed binary mask b∈{0,1}U, replace the ReLU at hidden unit v by multiplication of its preactivation by bv. Its preactivation and the final output are now polynomials in the w parameters. By induction along the graph, a unit of rank j has polynomial degree at most j: input values have degree zero, multiplication by an edge coefficient raises degree by one, addition of a bias has degree one, and multiplication by a fixed mask entry changes no degree. Thus every such polynomial has degree at most K≤w. On any actual parameter vector the convention bv=1zv>0 gives a unique mask, even when a preactivation is zero, and the masked polynomials then reproduce every actual unit value.

3.1F2step 2.1constructalgebra

For each sample point and each of the 2U masks, form the U preactivation polynomials and the output polynomial minus a. There are M=m(U+1)2U polynomials, all of degree at most w. Their strict-positivity vector determines the actual output classification at every sample point: evaluate units in topological order, determining their actual mask by the relevant preactivation entry, then read the output entry for that mask. Hence the number of label vectors is at most (2Mw+1)w≤(3mw22w)w by [F2]. If the classifier uses ≥a, take the hidden-unit mask 1zv≥0 and use nonnegativity vectors throughout; at zero, multiplying by either mask value still gives the ReLU value, so the same count holds.

3.2F2step 1.1step 2.1constructalgebra

For a second count, start with the single parameter-space cell Rw. At stage j, refine every existing cell by the activation bits of all units of rank j at all m sample points; at the final stage refine by the output threshold bits. Within a cell, all earlier mask bits are fixed, so the relevant mNj preactivation polynomials, or output-minus-threshold polynomials, have degree at most j≤K by step 2.1, where Nj is the number of units at that rank, with NK=1 for the output. By [F2] there are at most (2mNjK+1)w≤(3mwK)w refinements of each cell. This estimate holds on an arbitrary cell; no connectedness or openness is needed. After K stages, the number of cells, hence the number of output label vectors, is at most (3mwK)wK. The construction using ≥0 activation bits and nonnegativity output bits proves the identical bound for the other threshold convention.

4.1F3step 3.1algebra

Put m0=64w2. At this sample size the base-two logarithm of the last bound is w(log⁡23+log⁡2m0+2log⁡2w+w)=w(w+log⁡23+6+4log⁡2w)≤13w2<m0, using log⁡2w≤w for integers w≥1. Thus no m0-point set can be shattered, and [F3] rules out all larger shattered sets. Consequently VC⁡(Ha)<64w2≤64W2.

5.1F3step 1.1step 4.1step 3.2algebra∎

Write A=wK and B=log⁡2(2w)≥1, and take the integer m1=⌈64AB⌉≤65AB. Since K≤w, one has log⁡2A≤2log⁡2w and log⁡2B≤B. The base-two logarithm of the label-count bound at m=m1 is at most Alog⁡2(195A2B)≤A(8+4log⁡2w+log⁡2B)≤A(4+5B)≤9AB<m1. No set of m1 points is shattered. Therefore VC⁡(Ha)<m1≤65wKlog⁡2(2w)≤65WLlog⁡2(2W). Conversion between logarithm bases changes only an absolute constant. For W≥2, log⁡(2W)≤2log⁡W and L≥1, so this implies the requested CL2Wlog⁡W estimate. Together with step 4.1 and the constant-output case, this proves every assertion.

Remarks

The stronger CWLlog⁡(2W) layer estimate is included because the same elementary proof gives it. The classical CL2Wlog⁡W estimate is used in Yarotsky's stated approximation lower bound and is preserved here. The use of log⁡(2W) before imposing W≥2 avoids the false zero bound at W=1. A variable final threshold can be absorbed into the already present output bias and does not require a new parameter slot.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

8 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources