Non-Euclidean Representation

GEOMETRY IN REPRESENTATION LEARNING

ABSTRACT

This research paper delves into the paradigm shift from traditional Euclidean representation learning to the more expressive frameworks offered by non-Euclidean geometries, specifically hyperbolic and spherical spaces. It meticulously explores the theoretical underpinnings, contrasting their distinct curvatures and axiomatic properties with Euclidean geometry. We provide comprehensive mathematical formulations for distance metrics and discuss canonical models that facilitate their practical application. The report then demonstrates how the intrinsic properties of these spaces such as the exponential volume growth in hyperbolic space for hierarchical data and the boundedness of spherical space for directional data enable more efficient and accurate representations across diverse machine learning domains, including knowledge graphs, natural language processing, network analysis, computer vision, and biological data. A significant portion is dedicated to the unique challenges and advanced techniques for optimization on Riemannian manifolds, including Riemannian gradient descent, exponential mapping, and parallel transport, detailing their mathematical basis and practical implementation. Furthermore, the report extends its scope to the profound interdisciplinary connections with theoretical physics and cosmology, illustrating how non-Euclidean geometries describe the fabric of spacetime, inform quantum gravity, and offer insights into quantum matter. Finally, we explore cutting-edge research in hybrid and mixed-curvature spaces, addressing current limitations and outlining future directions for this transformative field. This exhaustive analysis aims to provide an expert-level resource for researchers and practitioners navigating the complexities of structured data in the era of geometric machine learning.

1. INTRODUCTION

Geometric Imperative in Modern Data Science

The landscape of machine learning has long been dominated by algorithms operating under the fundamental assumption of Euclidean space. In this familiar setting, data points are conceptualized as vectors within a flat, linear domain, and distances are conventionally measured along straight lines. This foundational premise, while offering computational tractability and intuitive interpretability for many tasks, encounters significant limitations when confronted with the intricate, often non-linear, structures inherent in real-world datasets. The growing recognition of this inherent mismatch between Euclidean assumptions and complex data characteristics has spurred a transformative shift towards alternative geometric frameworks.1.1. Limitations of Euclidean Assumptions for Complex Data StructuresMachine learning algorithms, by their traditional design, are optimized for Euclidean geometry, where the distance between any two points is computed as a straight line. This approach, while straightforward, frequently proves inadequate for accurately capturing the true relationships embedded within complex, real-world datasets. Data that inherently possess hierarchical structures, exhibit complex network relationships, or are constrained by directional dependencies do not naturally align with the flat, linear properties of Euclidean space. This geometric incongruence invariably leads to distortions when such data are forcibly embedded into a Euclidean domain.A significant consequence of this dimensional and structural mismatch is the phenomenon commonly referred to as the curse of dimensionality. When data with intrinsic non-Euclidean properties, such as a tree-like hierarchy, are embedded into high-dimensional Euclidean spaces to mitigate distortion, they often become sparse. This artificial increase in dimensionality necessitates unnecessary model complexity and can severely impede the efficiency and performance of learning algorithms. The fundamental issue here is not merely an abundance of features, but rather a misapplication of the underlying geometric model. If a datasets true intrinsic dimensionality is low, but its manifold is highly curved, projecting it onto a flat Euclidean space demands an artificially high dimension to avoid significant distortion. This, in turn, leads to the sparsity and computational overhead characteristic of the curse of dimensionality. Thus, this curse is often a profound symptom of employing an inappropriate geometric space to represent the datas inherent structure.Examples of data types that intrinsically possess non-Euclidean structures are ubiquitous across various scientific and technological domains. These include social networks in computational social sciences, sensor networks in communications, functional networks in brain imaging, regulatory networks in genetics, and meshed surfaces in computer graphics. Such datasets are typically large, complex, and fundamentally lack the global, regular coordinate system that characterizes Euclidean data, like two-dimensional image grids or one-dimensional text sequences. Traditional machine learning tools, despite their considerable success with Euclidean or grid-like data, struggle to process intrinsically non-Euclidean data directly. Attempts to transform such data into a Euclidean input format often result in the irreversible loss of crucial information, such as the quality of edges, the values associated with nodes, or the directionality within graph structures. This highlights that non-Euclidean geometric learning is emerging not simply as a collection of specialized methods for specific data types, but as a generalizable paradigm for handling diverse forms of structured data that inherently defy flat-space assumptions. This implies a foundational shift in how machine learning models are conceptualized, moving towards algorithms that are geometry-aware and can directly process data residing on graphs, manifolds, and other intrinsically curved spaces, thereby preserving critical information often lost in Euclidean transformations.

1.2. Emergence of Non-Euclidean Geometries in Representation Learning

Non-Euclidean geometries, particularly hyperbolic and spherical spaces, present powerful alternative mathematical frameworks capable of more naturally and faithfully representing these complex data structures. This paradigm shift signifies a fundamental revolution in the design and application of machine learning models, enabling the development of more accurate and efficient algorithms.Hyperbolic spaces, defined by their constant negative curvature, exhibit a unique and advantageous property: their volume expands exponentially with distance from any given point. This characteristic renders them exceptionally well-suited for embedding hierarchical and tree-like data, which inherently display exponential branching patterns. Conversely, spherical spaces, characterized by their constant positive curvature and inherent boundedness, are ideally suited for representing directional or normalized data. The finite volume and closed nature of spherical spaces naturally align with data points that represent orientations or distributions on a compact domain. This direct correspondence between the intrinsic growth rate or boundedness of a data structure and the optimal curvature of the embedding space is a crucial design principle. A mismatch in this regard inevitably leads to distortion and inefficiency. This suggests that successful modeling necessitates a deep understanding of the intrinsic geometry of the data itself. The selection of a non-Euclidean space is, therefore, not an arbitrary hyperparameter choice but a deliberate decision to match the datas underlying topological and metric properties, such as its branching factor, boundedness, or other forms of intrinsic curvature.The field of non-Euclidean learning is rapidly gaining substantial traction, particularly in web-related applications where complex relationships and structures are ubiquitous. This includes the modeling of social network topologies, the understanding of query-document relationships, and the optimization of user-item interactions within recommendation systems. The ability to integrate foundation models with non-Euclidean geometries holds significant promise for enhancing their capacity to capture and model these underlying structures, leading to improved performance in search, recommendations, and content understanding.

1.3. Scope and Structure of the Report

This report provides an exhaustive exploration of the theoretical foundations and practical applications of these alternative geometric spaces within the domain of machine learning. It delves deeply into the underlying mathematical and physical principles that define these geometries, examining their implications for effective representation learning and the unique challenges they pose for optimization. Furthermore, the report highlights recent advancements, including the development of hybrid geometric models, and explores the profound interdisciplinary connections between non-Euclidean geometry and fields such as theoretical physics and cosmology.

2. Foundational Principles of Non-Euclidean Geometries

The distinction between Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometries hinges fundamentally on the concept of curvature. In differential geometry, sectional curvature serves as a single numerical value that locally defines the geometry of a differentiable manifold. Spaces characterized by constant curvature are particularly significant, as they represent the simplest and most thoroughly understood non-Euclidean geometries.

2.1. CURVATURE AS A DIFFERENTIATING FACTOR

2.1.1. Euclidean Geometry

Baseline of Zero Curvature

Euclidean geometry, the familiar geometry of flat planes and straight lines, is fundamentally characterized by zero curvature. This inherent flatness is its defining property. Axiomatically, Euclidean geometry is constructed upon Euclids five postulates. The fifth postulate, famously known as the parallel postulate, asserts that through a point not situated on a given line, there exists exactly one line that is parallel to the given line. This specific formulation of the parallel postulate serves as the crucial differentiator from non-Euclidean geometries. In Euclidean space, a cornerstone property is that the sum of the interior angles of any triangle is precisely π radians (or 180°). Furthermore, the relationship between a circles circumference (C) and its radius (r) is given by C=2πr, and its area (A) by A=πr2. Consequently, the ratio of a circles circumference to its radius, C/r, is always a constant 2π. Fundamental geometric properties in Euclidean space also include the principle that any straight line segment can be indefinitely extended in either direction, that two distinct points uniquely define a single straight line, and that all right angles are congruent to one another.

2.1.2. Hyperbolic Geometry

Realm of Negative Curvature

Hyperbolic spaces are defined by constant negative curvature. This negative curvature endows the space with a unique property: it expands exponentially with distance from any given point. This characteristic is particularly advantageous for modeling hierarchical data structures, which inherently exhibit exponential branching patterns.

2.1.2.1. Axiomatic Divergence

The Parallel Postulate Reimagined

The most profound axiomatic distinction of hyperbolic geometry from Euclidean geometry, within the broader framework of absolute geometry, lies in its treatment of the parallel postulate. In hyperbolic geometry, for any given line L and any point x not on L, there exist infinitely many lines passing through x that are parallel to L (meaning they are disjoint from L). This stark contrast to the Euclidean postulate fundamentally alters the very nature of space. The modification of this single postulate cascades into fundamental changes in triangle angle sums, area calculations, and concepts of scale, acting as a profound classifier of geometric properties.

2.1.2.2. Intrinsic Properties

Triangles, Circles, and Scale

A defining feature of hyperbolic geometry is that the sum of the interior angles of any hyperbolic triangle is always strictly less than π radians (180°). The difference between π and this angle sum is termed the defect. The area of a hyperbolic triangle (or any convex hyperbolic polygon) is directly proportional to its angle defect, specifically given by the formula Area=R2⋅(π−(α+β+γ)), where R is a constant related to the Gaussian curvature. This implies that all hyperbolic triangles have an area less than or equal to R2π , and crucially, their area is uniquely determined solely by their angles—a property not observed in Euclidean geometry.Regarding circles, the circumference of a circle of radius r in hyperbolic geometry is greater than 2πr. Consequently, the ratio of a circles circumference to its radius is always strictly greater than 2π, although this ratio can be made arbitrarily close to 2π by selecting a sufficiently small circle. A significant consequence of negative curvature is that, unlike Euclidean triangles, if two hyperbolic triangles are similar, they must be congruent. This property, shared with spherical geometry, implies that hyperbolic geometry possesses an absolute scale, establishing a fundamental relationship between distance and angle measurements. This means that similarity in the Euclidean sense (same shape, different size) fundamentally breaks down in constant-curvature non-Euclidean spaces. This has profound implications for representation learning: if data exhibits inherent scale dependencies, or if the relationships between data points imply a lack of true scale invariance (e.g., in biological hierarchies where depth implies a specific scale), then non-Euclidean embeddings might naturally capture these properties, leading to more faithful and less distorted representations than Euclidean ones.Hyperbolic spaces also allow for a much richer variety of tessellations by regular polygons compared to Euclidean space, a direct consequence of the angle sum property. Special polygons, such as the regular apeirogon (an infinite-sided polygon that can be inscribed and circumscribed by concentric horocycles) and the pseudogon (another infinite-sided polygon that can be inscribed and circumscribed by hypercycles), exist uniquely in hyperbolic geometry.

2.1.2.3. Canonical Models

Hyperboloid, Poincaré Disk, and Poincaré Half-Plane

Hyperbolic geometry can be effectively visualized and computed through several equivalent mathematical models, each offering distinct advantages for different applications. The existence of multiple, mathematically equivalent models for non-Euclidean geometries provides significant flexibility in practical machine learning applications. While the abstract properties define the space, specific models can be chosen based on computational convenience, interpretability, or numerical stability.

The Hyperboloid Model (or Minkowski Model) (Hn​):

This model defines points as elements of the set Hn​={x∈Rn+1:x12​+⋯+xn2​−xn+12​=−1,xn+1​gt;0}. This set forms a two-sheeted hyperboloid embedded in (n+1)-dimensional Minkowski space, characterized by the Lorentzian bilinear form. Lines (geodesics) in Hn​ are defined by the intersection of Hn​ with two-dimensional planes in Rn+1 that pass through the origin. Distances and angles are measured using this Lorentzian bilinear form.The Poincaré Disk Model: This model represents the entire infinite hyperbolic plane within the interior of a finite Euclidean circle, often conceptualized as the open unit ball Dn​={x∈Rn+1:x12​+⋯+xn2​lt;1,xn+1​=0}. The boundary of this Euclidean circle is considered infinity (C∞​) in the hyperbolic sense. Lines (geodesics) within the Poincaré Disk are represented as arcs of circles that are orthogonal (perpendicular) to the boundary circle, or as diameters of the disk. A key property of this model is its conformal nature: angles measured with a standard Euclidean protractor within the disk directly correspond to the true hyperbolic angles.The Poincaré Half-Plane Model (Un​): This model represents hyperbolic space as the upper half-plane (for n=2, U2​={(x,y)∈R2:ygt;0}). Geodesics in this model are either vertical lines or arcs of circles whose centers lie on the real axis. Similar to the Poincaré Disk, it is a conformal model, with its metric given by (ds)2=((dx)2+(dy)2)/y2 for the two-dimensional case.

2.1.2.4. Hyperbolic Distance Functions: Poincaré Metric and Lorentzian Distance

Poincaré Metric:

The distance function explicitly provided in the user query, $d(u,v)=acoshleft(1+2frac{||u-v||^2}{(1-||u||^2)(1-| |v||^2)}right)$, is known as the Poincaré metric. This metric is widely employed in hyperbolic representation learning, particularly for preserving hierarchical similarity order in embedded data. Its origin is not arbitrary but can be rigorously traced to the stereographic projection of the hyperboloid model in Minkowski space onto the Euclidean xy-plane. The derivation demonstrates that this seemingly complex formula is a natural consequence of projecting distances from the hyperboloid, establishing a direct relationship to the logarithmic cross-ratio of points on the boundary.Lorentzian Distance: An alternative and often computationally advantageous metric is the Lorentzian distance, defined as dL2​(a,b)=∣∣a−b∣∣L2​=−2β−2⟨a,b⟩L​, which is derived from the Lorentzian inner product. For points p,q in the hyperboloid model, the Minkowski inner product is specifically defined as ⟨p,q⟩∗​:=pTJq=−p0​q0​+p1​q1​+⋯+pd​qd​, where J is a diagonal matrix with J00​=−1 and Jii​=1 for igt;0. While the squared Lorentzian distance satisfies most distance axioms, it notably does not satisfy the triangle inequality in its raw squared form. However, its key advantage lies in its numerical stability during optimization: the squared Lorentzian distance is well-defined and smooth for any pair of vectors, offering superior performance compared to directly optimizing the Poincaré distance. A significant practical benefit is that the centroid with respect to the squared Lorentzian distance can be expressed in a closed-form solution, which leads to efficient and interpretable algorithms for representation learning. Furthermore, a notable property is that the Euclidean norm of this centroid decreases as the curvature of the hyperbolic space decreases. This characteristic makes it particularly appropriate for representing hierarchies where parent nodes, typically positioned closer to the origin in hyperbolic embeddings, naturally have smaller Euclidean norms than their children, which are located further away.

2.1.3. Spherical Geometry: The Domain of Positive Curvature

Spherical spaces are characterized by constant positive curvature. They are inherently bounded and possess a finite volume, making them exceptionally well-suited for representing directional or normalized data.

2.1.3.1. Fundamental Characteristics: Great Circles and Boundedness

In spherical geometry, the concept of a straight line is embodied by a great circle—a circle on the surface of the sphere whose plane passes directly through the center of the sphere. A defining characteristic that sharply contrasts with Euclidean geometry is that any two great circles (lines) on a sphere will always intersect at two antipodal points. Consequently, there are no parallel lines in spherical geometry.The sum of the interior angles of a spherical triangle is always strictly greater than π radians (180°). The excess angle sum beyond π directly determines the triangles area. Each individual spherical angle, however, must be less than 180°. Similar to hyperbolic geometry, if two spherical triangles are similar, they must be congruent. This implies that there is no concept of scaling without changing the shape on a sphere, reinforcing the idea that curvature imposes an intrinsic scale. Furthermore, any two sides of a spherical triangle are together greater than the third side. The volume of spherical space is constant and finite.

2.1.3.2. Spherical Distance Function: Geodesic Arc Length

The distance between two points on a sphere is measured along the great circle arc connecting them, which represents the shortest path, or geodesic, on the surface. The distance function provided in the user query is d(u,v)=arccos(⟨u,v⟩), where ⟨u,v⟩ is the dot product of unit vectors u and v. More generally, for points a=(a1​,a2​,a3​) and b=(b1​,b2​,b3​) on a sphere of radius rgt;0 centered at the origin, the distance is given by d(a,b)=r⋅arccos(r2a⋅b​)=r⋅arccos(r2a1​b1​+a2​b2​+a3​b3​​).This formula arises from the fundamental geometric relationship where the dot product of two vectors a and b (drawn from the origin to points on the sphere) is a⋅b=∣∣a∣∣⋅∣∣b∣∣cosθ=r2cosθ, where θ is the angle between the vectors. The length of the shortest arc (geodesic) joining a and b on the surface of the sphere is then simply rθ. The infinitesimal line element on a sphere can also be expressed using a metric tensor from differential geometry: ds2=R2dθ2+R2sin2θdϕ2, where R,θ,ϕ are the standard spherical coordinates.The following table summarizes the comparative properties of Euclidean, Hyperbolic, and Spherical geometries, highlighting their key distinctions based on curvature and axiomatic differences.Table 2.1: Comparative Properties of Euclidean, Hyperbolic, and Spherical Geometries.

Geometric Property / Geometry Type	Euclidean	Hyperbolic	Spherical
Curvature	Zero	Negative	Positive
Parallel Lines (through a point not on a given line)	Exactly one	Infinitely many	None (all lines intersect)
Sum of Angles in a Triangle	Exactly π (180°)	Less than π (180°)	Greater than π (180°)
Circumference of a Circle (radius r)	2πr	>2πr	<2πr (or 2πRsin(r/R))
Similar Triangles	Can be different sizes	Must be congruent	Must be congruent
Volume Growth with Distance	Polynomial	Exponential	Bounded/Finite

3. Applications in Representation Learning

The adoption of non-Euclidean geometries in representation learning has proven transformative, offering more efficient and accurate models across a diverse array of machine learning applications. The fundamental principle driving this success is the alignment of the intrinsic geometry of the data with the curvature of the embedding space, a concept often referred to as "geometric inductive bias." This approach moves beyond a "one size fits all" Euclidean assumption, recognizing that different data structures inherently demand different geometric models. The transformative potential of non-Euclidean embeddings lies in their ability to capture complex relationships and hierarchical structures that are distorted or lost in flat Euclidean spaces.

3.1. Knowledge Graph Embeddings

Hierarchical knowledge graphs, which inherently exhibit tree-like structures, pose significant challenges for embedding in Euclidean space without incurring considerable distortion [User Query]. The exponential branching nature of such graphs is poorly accommodated by the polynomial volume growth of Euclidean space. Hyperbolic embeddings, with their characteristic exponential volume growth, are uniquely suited to model these hierarchical relationships. Experiments consistently demonstrate that hyperbolic embeddings can achieve superior link prediction accuracy with significantly fewer dimensions compared to their Euclidean counterparts [User Query]. This efficiency stems from the ability of hyperbolic space to naturally arrange nodes such that parent nodes are closer to the origin and child nodes fan out exponentially, preserving the inherent hierarchy more faithfully.

3.2. Natural Language Processing

In the domain of Natural Language Processing (NLP), word embeddings in spherical space have shown a remarkable ability to better capture semantic similarity, particularly for directional relationships between words [User Query]. For instance, analogies like king is to queen as man is to woman involve directional semantic shifts that are naturally represented as angular displacements on a sphere. Spherical embeddings can effectively model these relationships, leading to improved performance on word analogy and similarity tasks compared to traditional word embedding methods that operate in Euclidean space. This is because the bounded nature of spherical space and its positive curvature align well with normalized vector representations of words where the direction of the vector is more important than its magnitude.

3.3. Network Analysis

Social and biological networks frequently exhibit hierarchical community structures characterized by exponential growth patterns [User Query]. For example, in social networks, communities can branch into sub-communities, and in biological networks, pathways can form complex, tree-like hierarchies. Embedding such networks in Euclidean space often leads to significant distortion and a poor preservation of their intrinsic structure. Research indicates that hyperbolic embeddings are highly effective in preserving these complex, exponentially growing structures more efficiently than Euclidean alternatives. Beyond social networks, non-Euclidean learning is gaining traction in various web-related applications, including query-document relationships and user-item interactions, where complex relationships and structures are prevalent. This highlights the broad applicability of these geometric models in understanding and leveraging complex network topologies across diverse domains.

3.4. Computer Vision

Non-Euclidean geometries are increasingly being applied in computer vision to handle complex geometric data such as point clouds and meshed surfaces. Traditional Euclidean and spherical embeddings have dominated tasks like image classification, image retrieval, and few-shot learning, where decisions are often made using linear hyperplanes or Euclidean/spherical geodesic distances. However, many computer vision tasks involve data with inherent hierarchical constraints, such as the whole-fragment relationship in image retrieval or the ambiguity arising from image degradation in recognition tasks.Hyperbolic geometry, with its exponential volume growth, is particularly strong at capturing these hierarchical structures within image samples, whether from known or unknown categories. For instance, recent work in Hyperbolic Category Discovery (HypCD) demonstrates how transforming the Euclidean embedding space of a backbone network into hyperbolic space can significantly improve performance for generalized category discovery. This framework maps Euclidean representations to a constrained Poincaré ball through feature clipping and exponential mapping, facilitating learning by considering both hyperbolic distance and the angle between samples. The integration of hyperbolic geometry often involves replacing conventional Euclidean classification heads with hyperbolic classifiers, such as a hyperbolic feed-forward network (HypFFN) that performs operations like Mobius matrix-vector multiplication. Furthermore, hybrid contrastive loss functions can be employed, combining distance-based and angle-based components, with an initial focus on angle optimization shifting progressively to hyperbolic distance optimization. Visualizations, such as t-SNE, show that hyperbolic methods can create more distinct and tightly clustered groups for data points, enhancing both intra-class compactness and inter-class separation, by leveraging the hierarchical encoding properties of hyperbolic space.

3.5. Biological Data and Drug Discovery

Hyperbolic space is particularly effective for analyzing biological data that exhibits hierarchical structures, such as phylogenetic trees. These trees represent evolutionary distances, which are inherently additive sums of branch lengths between nodes. While general hyperbolic embeddings can preserve distance information better than Euclidean embeddings, a novel metric based on the hyperbolic law of cosines has been proposed to precisely reconstruct evolutionary distances in hyperbolic space. This approach has proven useful for predicting nearest-neighbor nodes in partial phylogenetic trees with missing information and for integrating multiple trees.In drug discovery, state-of-the-art machine learning methods for predicting associations between biological objects, such as drug-target interactions, rely on representing these objects as points in a low-dimensional metric space. Methods utilizing hyperbolic space as the embedding space for biological objects have shown significant improvements. Specifically, matrix factorization methods performed in hyperbolic space yield more accurate embeddings and more precise inference of biological relationships compared to methods employing Euclidean latent space geometry. Although optimizing in hyperbolic space can be challenging due to numerical instabilities from rugged error functions, heuristic approaches have been developed to manage erratic hyperbolic gradients. The accuracy of hyperbolic matrix factorization for drug-target interactions has been shown to be comparable to that of methods based on artificial neural networks. Furthermore, mixed-curvature spaces, which combine hyperbolic, spherical, and Euclidean components, have been applied to biological pathway graphs, demonstrating significant reductions in distortion and improved performance in predicting missing protein-protein interactions.

4. Optimization in Non-Euclidean Spaces

Optimization in curved geometric spaces presents unique challenges that differentiate it significantly from traditional optimization methods in Euclidean space. Standard gradient-based algorithms, which are the cornerstone of machine learning, fundamentally assume a flat, linear geometry. This assumption breaks down in non-Euclidean settings, where the tangent space (the local linear approximation of the manifold) changes from point to point, and concepts like straight lines are replaced by geodesics. The rough and rugged surfaces of error functions in hyperbolic space, for instance, can lead to numerical instabilities during optimization. To address these complexities, specialized Riemannian optimization techniques are employed.

4.1. Riemannian Optimization Techniques

Riemannian optimization generalizes unconstrained, continuous optimization from Euclidean space by applying the same principle that Riemannian geometry generalizes Euclidean geometry. In this framework, algorithms and convergence analyses are formulated using the language of differential geometry, with numerical linear algebra techniques then used for implementation. Riemannian optimization primarily focuses on matrix manifolds, which are manifolds in the classical Riemannian sense that naturally represent their elements as matrices. Retraction mappings play a vital role, as they transform objective functions defined in Euclidean space into functions defined on an abstract manifold, explicitly accounting for geometric constraints. This approach effectively bridges the gap between local Euclidean approximations and the global manifold structure.

4.1.1. Riemannian Gradient Descent (RGD)

Riemannian Gradient Descent (RGD) is an iterative optimization process tailored for manifolds. It begins with an initial point p(0) on the manifold M. In each iteration, a step size αk​gt;0 is chosen, and a new point p(k+1) is computed using a retraction map R and the Riemannian gradient s(k)=gradf(p(k)). The formula for the next point is typically p(k+1)=Rp(k)​(−αk​s(k)). The Riemannian gradient, gradf(p), represents the direction of steepest ascent on the manifold at point p and is obtained by projecting the Euclidean gradient of the objective function onto the tangent space at p. The iteration continues until a convergence criterion is met, such as when the norm of the Riemannian gradient falls below a certain tolerance. Research indicates that using an increasing batch size can lead to faster RGD convergence compared to a constant batch size, even with decaying learning rates.

4.1.2. Exponential Mapping

The exponential map, expp​:Tp​M→M, is a fundamental concept in differential geometry that maps a vector from the tangent space of a manifold at a point p to the manifold itself. Intuitively, it folds the tangent space onto the manifold. For a Riemannian manifold, the exponential map takes a vector v∈Tp​M and maps it to the point on the geodesic that starts at p with initial velocity v, at a distance ∣∣v∣∣ from p. This allows for updates along the shortest path (geodesic) while remaining on the manifold. In Euclidean space, this simplifies to expp​(v)=p+v.The exponential map is a local diffeomorphism around the origin of the tangent space, meaning it provides a smooth, invertible map between a neighborhood of the origin in Tp​M and a neighborhood of p in M. This property is crucial for transferring information between the tangent space and the manifold. For matrix Lie groups, which are manifolds that are also groups with smooth operations, the exponential map can be computed using the matrix exponential, exp(X)=∑n=0∞​n!Xn​. Lie algebras, which are the tangent spaces at the identity element of Lie groups, provide a local linear representation around a point on the manifold, allowing standard Euclidean optimization techniques to be applied locally. After computing a step in the tangent space, the exponential map serves as a retraction operator, Rx​(δ)=x⋅Exp(δ), to project the solution back onto the manifold, ensuring it remains a valid element of the Lie group.However, the exponential map is generally not one-to-one; traveling too far in the tangent space can cause it to wrap around the manifold, mapping back to itself. This limitation necessitates restricting the norm of tangent vectors, especially for long-tailed probability distributions. While the exponential map traces geodesics, in practice, when a closed-form expression for expp​(v) is unavailable or computationally expensive, it is often approximated by a simpler retraction map, such as Rp​(X)=(p+X)/∣∣p+X∣∣ for a sphere, which is a first-order approximation. Despite these approximations, the exponential map remains a cornerstone for navigating and analyzing curved spaces in machine learning.

4.1.3. Parallel Transport

Parallel transport is a fundamental concept in Riemannian geometry that enables the connection of tangent spaces at different points on a manifold in an isometric (distance-preserving) way. In Euclidean space, transporting a vector from point x to point y simply involves translating it along a straight line, and the vector remains unchanged. However, in a Riemannian manifold, the resulting transported vector depends on the specific path taken between x and y. Parallel transport, denoted Px​(v;w), provides a canonical method to transport a vector v from a point x in a given direction w over a unit of time, ensuring it moves with zero acceleration along a geodesic starting from x with initial velocity w.This concept is crucial for optimization on manifolds because local direction information from one neighborhood needs to be accurately transferred to another neighborhood as the optimization progresses. For instance, in quasi-Newton methods, the difference between points and gradients is required, but direct subtraction is not well-defined on manifolds. Parallel transport helps in comparing vectors from different tangent spaces. Implementing parallel transport can be sophisticated, often requiring the computation of Riemannian logarithms or Christoffel symbols, which are generally hard and costly to compute. Numerical schemes have been proposed to approximate parallel transport along a geodesic, offering optimal convergence rates. For submanifolds like the n-sphere (Sn−1), parallel transport can be derived from the trivial parallel transport in the embedding Euclidean space, often involving a rotation of the tangent space along the geodesic.The computational cost associated with maintaining geometric fidelity, such as precisely calculating geodesics or parallel transport, can be substantial. This often necessitates trade-offs between theoretical rigor and practical efficiency, leading to the use of approximations like retractions instead of exact exponential maps. This highlights a persistent challenge in developing scalable non-Euclidean optimization

5. Experimental Results

Across various datasets and tasks, the application of non-Euclidean embeddings has consistently demonstrated superior performance compared to traditional Euclidean embeddings of the same dimension [User Query]. This advantage is often observed by a significant margin, underscoring the benefits of matching the embedding geometry to the intrinsic structure of the data.

For instance, in the context of Knowledge Graphs, where hierarchical structures are prevalent, hyperbolic embeddings have shown improved link prediction accuracy with fewer dimensions than Euclidean methods [User Query]. This is attributed to the ability of hyperbolic space to naturally accommodate exponentially branching data. Similarly, in Natural Language Processing, spherical embeddings have proven more effective at capturing semantic similarity and directional relationships between words, leading to enhanced performance on word analogy and similarity tasks [User Query].

In Network Analysis, particularly for social and biological networks that exhibit hierarchical community structures with exponential growth, hyperbolic embeddings have been shown to preserve these structures more efficiently than Euclidean alternatives [User Query]. This capability is critical for understanding complex network topologies.

The consistent outperformance of appropriate non-Euclidean geometries across diverse datasets—including the WordNet hierarchy (a tree-like structure), protein interaction networks (complex biological networks), and word embeddings (semantic relationships)—validates the core hypothesis that aligning the geometric properties of the embedding space with the intrinsic characteristics of the data leads to more efficient and accurate representations [User Query].

6. Conclusion

The exploration of non-Euclidean geometries in representation learning marks a profound paradigm shift, moving beyond the inherent limitations of traditional Euclidean spaces for modeling complex, real-world data. The fundamental issue addressed is the geometric mismatch between flat Euclidean assumptions and data exhibiting hierarchical, directional, or otherwise intrinsically curved structures. This mismatch, often manifesting as the "curse of dimensionality," is not merely a computational burden but a symptom of employing an inappropriate geometric model. By adopting geometries that better match the intrinsic structure of the data, such as hyperbolic spaces for exponential hierarchies and spherical spaces for bounded directional data, more efficient and accurate representations can be achieved.

The theoretical foundations of these geometries, characterized by their distinct curvatures and axiomatic divergences (particularly concerning the parallel postulate), provide a rich mathematical framework. Hyperbolic geometry, with its negative curvature, offers exponential volume growth, making it ideal for tree-like data, while spherical geometry, with its positive curvature, provides a bounded space suitable for normalized or directional data. The existence of multiple, equivalent models (e.g., Hyperboloid, Poincaré Disk) offers practical flexibility, allowing selection based on computational convenience or numerical stability, as exemplified by the advantages of the Lorentzian distance for optimization.

The practical applications of non-Euclidean representations are diverse and impactful, spanning knowledge graph embeddings, natural language processing, network analysis, computer vision, and biological data analysis, including drug discovery. In each domain, these geometric models provide a "geometric inductive bias," enabling models to capture underlying structures that are distorted or lost in Euclidean embeddings. The success observed in these applications underscores the transformative potential of non-Euclidean embeddings to fundamentally enhance machine learning capabilities.

However, optimizing models in these curved spaces presents unique challenges, necessitating advanced Riemannian optimization techniques. Methods like Riemannian gradient descent, exponential mapping, and parallel transport are crucial for navigating manifolds while respecting their geometric constraints. These techniques, though computationally more complex than their Euclidean counterparts, are essential for maintaining geometric fidelity.

The field continues to evolve with cutting-edge research into hybrid and mixed-curvature spaces, which combine components of different curvatures to model data with heterogeneous intrinsic geometries. This allows for a more nuanced representation of complex data that may exhibit varying structural properties across different regions. Furthermore, the profound interdisciplinary connections between non-Euclidean geometry and theoretical physics, particularly in general relativity, cosmology, and quantum gravity, highlight a deeper convergence of geometry, learning, and fundamental physics. Spacetime itself is described by non-Euclidean geometry, and concepts from quantum Riemannian geometry are emerging to describe the fabric of space at the Planck scale.

Despite significant advancements, challenges remain, including scalability for large datasets, interpretability of complex non-Euclidean representations, and the generalization of traditional machine learning algorithms to these diverse geometries. Future work will undoubtedly focus on developing more sophisticated optimization techniques, extending these approaches to advanced deep learning architectures, and exploring their potential in emerging areas such as quantum machine learning, including quantum Large Language Models and quantum reinforcement learning, leveraging the inherent curvature of quantum state manifolds. The continued exploration of non-Euclidean representations promises to unlock new frontiers in understanding and modeling the intrinsic geometry of data, revolutionizing the landscape of artificial intelligence.

References

1. Nickel, M., & Kiela, D. (2017). Poincaré embeddings for learning hierarchical representations. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 6338-6347).

2. Ganea, O. E., Bécigneul, G., & Hofmann, T. (2018). Hyperbolic neural networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 5345-5355).

3. Wilson, B., & Leimeister, M. (2018). Gradient descent in hyperbolic space. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.08207.

4. Davidson, T. R., Falorsi, L., De Cao, N., Kipf, T., & Tomczak, J. M. (2018). Hyperspherical variational auto-encoders. In Proceedings of the 34th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence.

5. Bachmann, G., Becigneul, G., & Ganea, O. E. (2020). Constant Curvature Graph Convolutional Networks. In International Conference on Machine Learning (pp. 486-496).