Logarithmic-Laplacian Feature Regularizer
Implementation & benchmark of arXiv:2608.07315 — Hölder regularity and Harnack inequality for the logarithmic Laplacian
Source paper: Hölder regularity and Harnack inequality for the logarithmic Laplacian arXiv:2608.07315 ⓘ · analyzed Aug 31, 2026
AI-generated research hypothesis, automatically tested. Not peer-reviewed.
Idea description
Add a nonlocal logarithmic-Laplacian penalty to intermediate spatial feature maps or ordered token embeddings. Unlike a standard graph or image Laplacian, the kernel uses scale-free weights proportional to |z|^{-n} and includes a local compensation term, allowing multiscale feature smoothing without simply forcing nearby features to become identical.
Formulas
Mathematical statement
The paper defines the logarithmic Laplacian for u: R^n -> R^d by L_Δu(x) = c_n ∫_{R^n} [u(x) 1_{B_1}(z) - u(x+z)]/|z|^n dz + ρ_n u(x), where B_1 is the unit ball, c_n = π^{-n/2}Γ(n/2), Γ is the Gamma function, and ρ_n = 2 log 2 + ψ(n/2) - γ. Here ψ = Γ'/Γ is the Digamma function and γ = -Γ'(1) is the Euler-Mascheroni constant. The subtraction u(x)-u(x+z) inside the unit ball cancels the local singularity. For a feature tensor H_i in R^d at positions x_i, use the discretized operator Lhat_Δ H_i = c_n Σ_{j != i} w_ij [H_i 1[r_ij < 1] - H_j]/(r_ij + ε)^n + ρ_n H_i, where r_ij = ||x_j-x_i||_2, w_ij is a quadrature or pair weight, and ε prevents numerical divergence. The adapted regularizer is R(H) = (Nd)^{-1}Σ_i ||Lhat_Δ H_i||_2^2, added to the task loss. The transferable property is nonlocal, scale-free coupling across feature locations together with an explicit zeroth-order correction.
Implementation notes
Integrate the regularizer after one intermediate feature tensor: use the final convolutional feature map before global pooling, or a transformer hidden-state tensor before its prediction head. Represent the tensor as H with shape [batch, N, d], and assign each position a coordinate x_i: two-dimensional normalized pixel coordinates for CNNs, or one-dimensional normalized token coordinates for the first transformer test. Precompute a sparse pair list containing either all pairs with r_ij <= R or the K nearest positions. Normalize coordinates so the unit-ball cutoff has a controlled meaning, and set epsilon to 1e-3 times the median nonzero pair distance. For every batch item, compute the vectorized update Lhat_i = c_n * sum_j w_ij * (H_i * indicator(r_ij < 1) - H_j)/(r_ij + epsilon)^n + rho_n * H_i. Use w_ij=1 for a uniform grid, or quadrature cell areas for irregular coordinates. Compute R as the mean squared L2 norm of Lhat divided by d, then add lambda R to the task loss. Obtain c_n and rho_n using library Gamma, Digamma, and Euler-constant functions; estimate only R, K, epsilon, lambda, and the insertion layer empirically. The first cheap test should use CIFAR-10 with ResNet-18, comparing cross-entropy alone, a nearest-neighbor graph-Laplacian penalty, and this logarithmic penalty while matching regularizer gradient norms. Measure clean accuracy, CIFAR-10-C corruption accuracy, training stability, feature high-frequency energy, and wall-clock overhead. Success means higher validation or corruption accuracy at matched training accuracy, with less feature collapse than ordinary Laplacian smoothing.
Verification
This idea has not been verified yet.
Verification happens in two stages: Stage 1 — a mechanism check on a toy system confirms the claimed mathematical phenomenon reproduces; Stage 2 — a benchmark implements the idea on a real (small) neural network task and compares it against a tuned baseline over 8 paired seeds with a permutation test.
Artifacts
Artifacts unavailable.