When do complex-valued neural networks help? A study of representation, geometry, and optimization

Abstract

Complex-valued Neural Networks (CVNNs) are often motivated by domains where information is naturally encoded in magnitude and phase. Yet complex-valued inputs alone do not determine when complex arithmetic improves learning: the label signal may lie in amplitude, phase, their coupling, or a symmetry that real-valued models can also represent under suitable coordinates. We study this through a representation-first evaluation of CVNNs against Cartesian real, polar, phase-only, magnitude-only, parameter-matched real, and FLOP-matched real baselines. Across synthetic RF tasks, complex representations are useful but not universally superior. PSK-only tasks favor phase-aware and complex-valued models, QAM-only tasks favor magnitude-based models, mixed PSK+QAM gives only a small complex-valued advantage, and unseen carrier-phase rotations break coordinate-dependent models without augmentation. Similar patterns appear beyond RF: in quantum-wavefunction prediction, momentum is invisible to $|ψ|$ but recoverable from phase, while EEG analytic-signal experiments show that phase locking, amplitude bursts, and phase-amplitude coupling each favor different coordinate views. We also identify a benchmarking artifact on RadioML 2018.01A. Under matched-shared-trial selection, a CReLU complex model exceeds the best real baseline by 22.94 PP; under independent per-family tuning on the same data and 16-trial search space, the gap collapses to 2.46 PP. Gradient analysis traces the inflated gap to high-learning-rate first-step instability in real baselines, while complex parameter coupling distributes the loss signal more robustly. A learning-rate $\times$ activation factorial confirms the failure is primarily hyperparameter-driven. Overall, CVNNs are best viewed as structured inductive biases whose gains depend on representation, symmetry, and optimization, not as universally superior architectures.