Paper Reading AI Learner

Breakdown of Autoregressive Multi-Step Reasoning Under Concentrated vs. Diffuse Attention Head Dropout

2026-11-10 15:29:57
Karol Struniawski

Abstract

During extended wakefulness, mammalian neocortical networks experience localized periods of transient neuronal silence termed off-states. Here, we examine how analogous spatiotemporally concentrated disruptions affect sequential reasoning in autoregressive Large Language Models (LLMs). Evaluating 250 paired derivations on the GSM8K benchmark across two 8B models (Qwen3-8B and LLaMA-3.1-8B-Instruct), we contrast clustered bursts of attention head masking against budget-matched diffuse i.i.d. dropout. Concentrated bursts induce substantial reasoning degradation: at onset parameter $\mathcal{B}=0.10$ (scheduling $\sim 5.7\%$ of vulnerable head-token volume), Qwen3-8B accuracy drops from $91.2\%$ under diffuse noise to $78.8\%$ under burst dropout ($\Delta = -12.4$ percentage points [pp], exact McNemar $p = 5.5 \times 10^{-6}$), while LLaMA-3.1-8B-Instruct drops from $84.0\%$ to $76.8\%$ ($\Delta = -7.2$ pp, $p = 0.0198$). Conversely, dispersing the identical cumulative budget uniformly across generation steps via stratified quintile matching yields substantially milder degradation (retaining $91.2\%$ in Qwen and $84.0\%$ in LLaMA). In an exploratory factorial dissociation ($N=100$), single-step dropout density is associated with an acute drop in a single schedule draw ($-10.0$ pp on Qwen, $p_{\text{holm}} = 0.0425$), while multi-token continuity exhibits an inconclusive compounding trend ($-7.0$ pp, $p_{\text{holm}} = 0.1892$). Error analysis reveals that Qwen failures reflect derivation errors within formatted responses (conditional accuracy drop of $-11.4$ pp), whereas in LLaMA $22.2\%$ of discordant losses lack a final answer format line (conditional gap narrows to $-5.0$ pp). These findings demonstrate that autoregressive reasoning chains are particularly vulnerable to concentrated structural disruptions, providing empirical benchmarks for fault tolerance in transformer architectures.

Abstract (translated)

URL

https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14209

PDF

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2611.14209.pdf


Tags
3D Action Action_Localization Action_Recognition Activity Adversarial Agent Attention Autonomous Bert Boundary_Detection Caption Chat Classification CNN Compressive_Sensing Contour Contrastive_Learning Deep_Learning Denoising Detection Dialog Diffusion Drone Dynamic_Memory_Network Edge_Detection Embedding Embodied Emotion Enhancement Face Face_Detection Face_Recognition Facial_Landmark Few-Shot Gait_Recognition GAN Gaze_Estimation Gesture Gradient_Descent Handwriting Human_Parsing Image_Caption Image_Classification Image_Compression Image_Enhancement Image_Generation Image_Matting Image_Retrieval Inference Inpainting Intelligent_Chip Knowledge Knowledge_Graph Language_Model LLM Matching Medical Memory_Networks Multi_Modal Multi_Task NAS NMT Object_Detection Object_Tracking OCR Ontology Optical_Character Optical_Flow Optimization Person_Re-identification Point_Cloud Portrait_Generation Pose Pose_Estimation Prediction QA Quantitative Quantitative_Finance Quantization Re-identification Recognition Recommendation Reconstruction Regularization Reinforcement_Learning Relation Relation_Extraction Represenation Represenation_Learning Restoration Review RNN Robot Salient Scene_Classification Scene_Generation Scene_Parsing Scene_Text Segmentation Self-Supervised Semantic_Instance_Segmentation Semantic_Segmentation Semi_Global Semi_Supervised Sence_graph Sentiment Sentiment_Classification Sketch SLAM Sparse Speech Speech_Recognition Style_Transfer Summarization Super_Resolution Surveillance Survey Text_Classification Text_Generation Time_Series Tracking Transfer_Learning Transformer Unsupervised Video_Caption Video_Classification Video_Indexing Video_Prediction Video_Retrieval Visual_Relation VQA Weakly_Supervised Zero-Shot