Paper detail

Beyond topography: Topographic regularization improves robustness and reshapes representations in convolutional neural networks

Topographic convolutional neural networks (TCNNs) are computational models that can simulate aspects of the brain's spatial and functional organization. However, it is unclear whether and how different types of topographic regularization shape robustness, representational structure, and functional organization during end-to-end training. We address this question by comparing TCNNs trained with two local spatial losses applied to a penultimate-layer topographic grid: i) Weight Similarity (WS), whose objective penalizes differences between neighboring units' incoming weight vectors, and ii) Activation Similarity (AS), whose objective penalizes differences between neighboring units' activation patterns over stimuli. We evaluate the trained models on classification accuracy, robustness to weight perturbations and input degradation, the spatial organization of learned representations, and development of category-selective "expert units" in the penultimate layer. Both losses changed inter-unit correlation structure, but in qualitatively different ways. WS produced smooth topographies, with correlated neighborhoods. In contrast, AS produced a bimodal inter-unit correlation structure that lacked spatial smoothness. AS and WS training increased robustness relative to control (non-topographic) models: AS improved robustness to image degradation on CIFAR-10, WS did so on MNIST, and both improved robustness to weight perturbations. WS was also associated with greater input sensitivity at the unit level and stronger functional localization. In addition, as compared to control models, both AS and WS produced differences in orientation tuning, symmetry sensitivity, and eccentricity profiles of units. Together, these results show that local topographic regularization can improve robustness during end-to-end training while systematically reshaping representational structure.

preprint2026arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.