Revisiting the Platonic Representation Hypothesis: An Aristotelian View

May combine two claims.

The permutation p-value is super-uniform under H0, giving finite-sample Type-I control for calibrated scores.

“The permutation p-value in Equation ( 10) is super-uniform under H 0 (i.e., P H0 (p ≤ α) ≤ α for all α ∈ [0, 1]), a standard consequence of randomization inference (Nichols & Holmes, 2002;Phipson & Smyth, 2010;Good, 2005)”

• cites Nichols & Holmes, 2002 sourceSupported
• cites Phipson & Smyth, 2010 sourceSupported
• cites Good, 2005Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

Resampling-based maxT procedures can calibrate such aggregates, but this has not yet been applied in representational similarity studies.

“While resampling-based “maxT” procedures (Westfall & Young, 1993;Nichols & Holmes, 2002) can calibrate such aggregates, this has not yet been applied in representational similarity studies.”

• cites Westfall & Young, 1993Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Nichols & Holmes, 2002 sourceSupported

May combine two claims.

The empirical calibration closely matches existing analytical bias corrections for CKA, recovering the width correction without metric-specific derivation.

“Furthermore, we verify that our empirical calibration closely matches existing analytical bias corrections for CKA (Murphy et al., 2024), recovering the width correction without metric-specific derivation (Section F.4).”

• cites Murphy et al., 2024 sourceSupported

May combine two claims.

The dep-cols CKA of Chun et al. (2025) is designed to correct column dependence, which is not a confound in the experimental setup (where columns are independent by construction), and as a result it attenuates the true signal under H1.

“In contrast, dep-cols CKA is designed to correct column dependence, which is not a confound in our experimental setup (where columns are independent by construction), and as a result, it attenuates the true signal under H 1 .”

• cites Chun et al. (2025) sourceSupported

May combine two claims.

Higher-rank signals are detected at higher noise levels, stronger signals maintain elevated scores across a wider noise range, higher-rank signals decay more gradually than rank-1, and all curves converge to zero at high noise, confirming that the null floor is calibrated correctly no matter the signal strength or rank.

“Higher-rank signals are detected at higher noise levels.The clear gradient confirms calibration preserves sensitivity to genuine structure.”

• Also stated in: § F.2. SNR sweep heatmaps · plain

  “Stronger signals (larger s) maintain elevated scores across a wider range of noise levels before eventually succumbing.Higher-rank signals (r = 5, 10) show more gradual decay compared to r = 1, consistent with their greater statistical detectability.All curves converge to zero at high noise, confirming that the null floor is correctly calibrated regardless of signal strength or rank.”

May combine two claims.

Under the null assumptions of Theorem D.9, the per-anchor intersection size is hypergeometric with mean k^2/(n-1) and variance k^2(n-1-k)^2/((n-1)^2(n-2)); the variance of mKNN is at most 1/4, and under an additional independence assumption across anchors it is O(1/n).

“Under the assumptions of Theorem D.9, for each anchor i the intersection size H i := |N X (i) ∩ N Y (i)| is hypergeometric with mean k 2 /(n -1) andvariance Var[H i ] = k 2 (n -1 -k) 2 (n -1) 2 (n -2) .”

• Also stated in: § D.6. Null Baselines for Neighborhood Metrics · plain

  “Moreover, since mKNN(X, Y) ∈ [0, 1] deterministically, we have the fully general bound Var[mKNN(X, Y)] ≤ 1 4 . If one additionally assumes that the per-anchor terms {|N X (i) ∩ N Y (i)|/k} n i=1 are independent (this is a modeling assumption, not a consequence of H 0 ), then Var[mKNN(X, Y)] = O(1/n).”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The per-anchor terms in mKNN are independent across anchors (a modeling assumption, not a consequence of the null).
• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The rows of X and Y are independent and identically distributed, and X is independent of Y.

May combine two claims.

Under H0, uncalibrated scores increase with d/n, while calibrated scores stay at zero across settings.

“Under H 0 , uncalibrated scores increase with d/n, while our calibrated scores stay at zero across settings (Figure 3).”

May combine two claims.

The magnitude of the null baseline is metric-dependent: CKA's baseline scales as O(d/n) and mKNN's as O(k/n).

“Importantly, the magnitude of the null baseline is metric-dependent, consistent with our theory: CKA's baseline scales as O(d/n) (Proposition 4.1), while mKNN's baseline scales as O(k/n) (Proposition 4.2).”

The quote only partly states this claim.

Under uniform sub-Gaussian right tails and integrability (Assumption D.5), for M ≥ 2 the expected maximum of M such variables is bounded by μ + Cσ√(log M), with C a positive constant (e.g., 3).

“Under Assumption D.5 and for M ≥ 2, E max ℓ,ℓ ′ S ℓ,ℓ ′ ≤ µ + C σ log M ,(47) where C > 0 is a constant (e.g., one can take C = 3).”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The null similarity fluctuations have uniform sub-Gaussian right tails and are integrable (Assumption D.5).

May combine two claims.

Models converge in local neighborhood structure: they increasingly agree on which points are neighbors, but do not agree on pairwise distances.

“Further analysis (Section F.9) reveals that models converge in local neighborhood structure: models increasingly agree on which points are neighbors, but do not agree on the pairwise distances, since CKA-RBF with a small bandwidth shows no alignment after calibration.”

May combine two claims.

Raw similarity scores stay high (roughly 0.4-0.6) even when noise is so high that no signal is detectable, while calibrated scores drop to near zero; this pattern appears across all tested noise distributions, suggesting permutation-based calibration adapts without explicit distributional modeling.

“The key finding is that raw scores remain elevated (around 0.4-0.6)even at high noise levels where no detectable signal remains, while calibrated scores correctly collapse to near-zero.This pattern holds across all noise distributions tested, confirming that permutation-based calibration adapts to the data-generating process without requiring explicit distributional modeling.”

May combine two claims.

The SNR sweep heatmaps show a clear phase transition: raw scores are uniformly high across most of the grid and obscure the detection boundary, while calibrated scores concentrate high values in the low-noise, high-signal corner and collapse to zero as noise increases or signal weakens; the detection boundary shifts rightward as signal rank increases.

“The results reveal a clear phase transition structure.Raw scores (top) show uniformly high values across most of the grid, obscuring the true detection boundary.Calibrated scores (bottom) reveal the underlying signal: high scores concentrate in the low-noise, high-signal corner (bottom-left), while scores correctly collapse to zero as noise increases (moving right) or signal weakens (moving down).”

• Also stated in: § F.2. SNR sweep heatmaps · plain

  “The detection boundary shifts rightward (tolerating higher noise) as signal rank increases.”

May combine two claims.

The null baseline varies with sample size and dimension, acting as a confounding variable in comparative studies.

“It also varies with sample size and dimension, thus acting as a confounding variable in comparative studies.”

May combine two claims.

Applying the framework to the Platonic Representation Hypothesis indicates that earlier reports of global spectral convergence are largely explained by width and depth confounds, while local neighborhood alignment remains significant, motivating an Aristotelian Representation Hypothesis.

“Applying our framework to the Platonic Representation Hypothesis reveals that previously reported global spectral convergence is largely confounded by width and depth, whereas local neighborhood alignment remains significant, motivating an Aristotelian Representation Hypothesis.”

May combine two claims.

Threshold estimates stabilize rapidly, reaching stable values by about K=50 for all metrics tested; calibrated scores are more variable at very low budgets (K<50) with occasional spikes from unstable threshold estimation, but converge to near zero by K≈100-200.

“Threshold estimates (left) stabilize rapidly, reaching stable values by approximately K = 50 for all metrics tested.Calibrated scores (right) exhibit more variability at very low budgets (K < 50), with occasional spikes due to unstable threshold estimation, but converge to near-zero by K ≈ 100-200.”

May combine two claims.

Naively calibrating each scalar comparison still leads to inflation, highlighting the importance of calibrating the final statistic.

“We further show that naively calibrating each scalar comparison still leads to inflation, highlighting the importance of calibrating the final statistic.”

May combine two claims.

Local neighborhood similarity, but not local distances, retains significant agreement across different modalities after calibration.

“local neighborhood similarity, but not local distances, retains significant agreement across different modalities.”

May combine two claims.

For video-language alignment, local similarity (mKNN) shows a clear scaling trend with VideoMAE-Huge, whereas smaller video encoders act as a bottleneck limiting alignment regardless of language model size.

“In contrast, for local similarity (mKNN), a clear scaling trend emerges with VideoMAE-Huge, whereas smaller video encoders appear to act as a bottleneck, limiting alignment regardless of language model size.”

May combine two claims.

In video-language alignment, spectral alignment drops substantially after calibration, while neighborhood alignment trend remains after calibration.

“(a) Spectral alignment drops substantially after calibration.(b-d) Neighborhood alignment trend remains after calibration.”

May combine two claims.

All 204 vision-language model pairs are significant at p < 0.05, with most achieving p < 0.005 for both local and global metrics.

“All 204 vision-language model pairs are significant at p < 0.05, with most achieving p < 0.005 (the minimum achievable with K = 200 permutations) for both local and global metrics.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

RSA and mKNN show mild inflation below 0.1.

“mild inflation (RSA and mKNN, below 0.1).”

May combine two claims.

Spectral metrics (CKA linear, CKA RBF, unbiased CKA) show raw scores suggesting increasing alignment with model scale, but calibrated scores show no such scaling trend.

“Spectral metrics (CKA linear, CKA RBF, unbiased CKA) show a different pattern: raw scores suggest increasing alignment with model scale, but calibrated scores show no such scaling trend.”

May combine two claims.

The permutation threshold τα stabilizes by K ≈ 50, and calibrated scores under H0 converge to near-zero by K ≈ 100-200.

“Left: threshold τα stabilizes by K ≈ 50.Right: calibrated scores under H0 converge to near-zero by K ≈ 100-200.”

May combine two claims.

For CKA-RBF with varying bandwidth σ, at very small σ no significant alignment remains after calibration, while larger σ values show significant alignment but the scaling trend flattens after calibration.

“At very small σ (a), no significant alignment remains after calibration.Larger σ values (b-d) show significant alignment, but the scaling trend flattens after calibration.”

May combine two claims.

Power increases rapidly with signal strength, and calibration does not sacrifice sensitivity.

“(Right) Power increases rapidly with signal strength; calibration does not sacrifice sensitivity.”

May combine two claims.

When applied to the Platonic Representation Hypothesis, local and global similarity metrics diverge: neighborhood-based metrics keep significant cross-modal alignment after calibration, whereas spectral metrics lose their apparent convergence trend.

“The main text establishes a divergence between local and global similarity metrics when applied to the Platonic Representation Hypothesis (PRH): neighborhood-based metrics retain significant cross-modal alignment after calibration, while spectral metrics lose their apparent convergence trend.”

May combine two claims.

After null calibration, local neighborhood metrics retain significant alignment across model scales, whereas global spectral metrics lose their convergence trend and show no systematic increase with scale.

“Local metrics show substantial alignment above the null threshold that persists across scales, whereas global metrics, although significant, show no convergence in calibrated effect sizes.”

• Also stated in: § F.9. Characterizing the locality of cross-modal alignment · boosted

  “The main text establishes that local neighborhood metrics retain significant alignment after calibration, while global spectral metrics do not.”

• Also stated in: § F.9. Characterizing the locality of cross-modal alignment · plain

  “After calibration, global metrics lose their convergence trend, while local metrics retain significant alignment.”

May combine two claims.

Calibrated scores show no convergence trend regardless of significance level for CKA linear and CKA RBF, while local alignment and its scaling trend persist across all significance levels for mKNN.

“Calibrated scores show no convergence trend regardless of significance level.”

• Also stated in: § Additional information · plain

  “Local alignment and its scaling trend persist across all significance levels.”

May combine two claims.

In video-language experiments, spectral metrics show raw scores suggesting alignment, but calibrated scores drop significantly, indicating much apparent alignment is attributable to width and depth confounders.

“For spectral metrics, raw scores suggest alignment, whereas calibrated scores drop significantly, indicating that much of the apparent alignment is attributable to width and depth confounders.”

May combine two claims.

For mKNN, all tested neighborhood sizes k show significant alignment after calibration, with calibrated scores remaining well above zero even at k = 100.

“A consistent pattern emerges: all k values show significant alignment after calibration, with calibrated scores remaining well above zero even at k = 100.”

May combine two claims.

For mKNN with varying k, all k values show significant alignment after calibration, and the scaling trend is clearest at small k and flattens at large k, suggesting scaling improvements are concentrated at the finest local scale.

“All k values show significant alignment after calibration.The scaling trend is clearest at small k and flattens at large k, suggesting scaling improvements are concentrated at the finest local scale.”

May combine two claims.

Raw max-aggregates of linear CKA scores inflate with layer count under the null; calibrated aggregates are stable and show that naive entry-wise calibration still leads to inflation.

“Raw max-aggregates of linear CKA scores inflate with layer count under the null; calibrated aggregates are stable and show that naive entry-wise calibration still leads to inflation.”

May combine two claims.

For mKNN with k = 100, raw scores plateau for larger models, suggesting broader neighborhood agreement is already saturated across model scales.

“For k = 100, raw scores plateau for larger models, suggesting that broader neighborhood agreement is already saturated across model scales.”

May combine two claims.

Stricter thresholds (α = 0.01) produce slightly lower calibrated scores, while more permissive thresholds (α = 0.10) produce slightly higher ones, but the qualitative pattern is unchanged.

“Stricter thresholds (α = 0.01) produce slightly lower calibrated scores, while more permissive thresholds (α = 0.10) produce slightly higher ones, but the qualitative pattern is unchanged.”

May combine two claims.

The conclusions of the PRH analysis are invariant to the choice of significance level α: global metrics show no convergence trend at any α, and local metrics retain their alignment trend across α ∈ {0.01, 0.05, 0.10}.

“Figures 23 to 25 show that the conclusions are entirely invariant to the choice of α.For global metrics, calibrated scores show no convergence trend at any significance level.For local metrics, calibrated scores retain their alignment trend across all three α values.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

Since deeper models tend to be wider as well, raw comparisons are doubly confounded.

“Furthermore, since deeper models tend to be wider as well, raw comparisons are doubly confounded.”

May combine two claims.

The null interaction energy scales as O(d_x d_y/n); when dimensions are comparable to sample size, it is O(n) and does not vanish, explaining why spectral similarity metrics have a positive baseline under the null that depends on sample size and dimensions.

“The null interaction energy is O(d x d y /n).In the common regime d x , d y ≍ n, the null energy is O(n) and therefore does not vanish.Since many spectral similarity metrics aggregate singular values (e.g., via ∥ C∥ 2 F = i σ 2 i ( C)), this already explains a positive baseline under H 0 and its dependence on (n, d x , d y ).”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

Permutation calibration is finite-sample valid when the n row pairs are treated as exchangeable units (Assumption 3.1).

“Permutation calibration is finite-sample valid under Assumption 3.1, which treats the n row pairs as exchangeable units.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The n row pairs are treated as exchangeable units (Assumption 3.1).

May combine two claims.

For any strictly increasing transformation g, applying the permutation calibration to g(s) yields the same p-value and null percentile as applying it to s.

“Let g : R → R be strictly increasing.Define p g by applying Equation (10) to the transformed statistic g • s using the same permutations.Then p g = p, and likewise the null percentile (the rank of s obs among the combined set) is invariant under g.”

May combine two claims.

The calibration framework addresses both finite-sample bias and selection inflation in a unified, metric-agnostic way.

“Our calibration framework addresses both finite-sample bias and selection inflation in a unified, metric-agnostic way.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Exchangeability can be violated in practice even when there is no sequential structure, for example with grouped or clustered samples.

“In practice, exchangeability can be violated even without a sequential structure (e.g., grouped/clustered samples).”

May combine two claims.

The neighborhood scale k can be fixed consistently across experiments, whereas the embedding dimension d is determined by model architecture and is difficult to control in comparison studies.

“The neighborhood scale k can be fixed consistently across experiments, whereas the embedding dimension d is determined by the model architecture, making it difficult to control in comparison studies.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

For independent and identically distributed normal variables, the centered maximum converges to a Gumbel distribution and its expectation has a known asymptotic approximation.

“For example, if S ℓ,ℓ ′ ∼ N (µ 0 , σ 2 0 ) i.i.d., the centered maximum converges to a Gumbel distribution and E[T max ] ≈ µ 0 + σ 0 √ 2 ln M - ln ln M + ln 4π 2 √ 2 ln M ,(54) as stated in standard references (Cramér, 1999;Embrechts et al., 2013).”

• cites Cramér, 1999Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Embrechts et al., 2013Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

Under Assumption 3.1, the permutation p-value from Equation (10) is super-uniform under the null, satisfying P_H0(p ≤ α) ≤ α for all α in [0,1], giving finite-sample validity.

“Under Assumption 3.1, the permutation p-value in Equation (10) satisfies super-uniformity: P H0 (p ≤ α) ≤ α for all α ∈ [0, 1] (finite-sample validity).”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The n row pairs are treated as exchangeable units (Assumption 3.1).

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

The Aristotelian refinement of the Platonic Representation Hypothesis emphasizes learned representations converging on relations among instances (who is near whom) rather than convergence toward a globally matching structure.

“Calling this refinement Aristotelian: it emphasizes learned representations converging on relations among instances (who is near whom) rather than the idea of convergence toward a globally matching structure.”

May combine two claims.

Cross-modal representations agree on neighborhood identity (which points are close) but not on exact local distances (how close they are).

“The fact that mKNN shows alignment at all k values while small-σ CKA-RBF shows no alignment reveals that cross-modal representations agree on neighborhood identity (which points are close) but not on exact local distances (how close they are).”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Different training objectives and architectures induce different distance scales in representation space while preserving the relative ordering of neighbors.