Paper Reading AI Learner

Sanity Checks for Attention Surgery: Null Models and Matched Interventions for Representation-Motivated Design

2026-11-10 04:06:26
Basavaraj R M, Aryan Bharat Kumar

Abstract

Transformer architectural modifications frequently measure a statistic on internal representations, observe that it is large, remove it architecturally, and report an improvement. Interpreting that sequence requires evaluating whether the statistic exceeds its noise floor, whether it survives a geometric null, and whether the training gain requires the specific direction removed. We formulate these requirements as three reusable checks and apply them to self-attention removal, which deletes the component of an attention head's output aligned with its own value vector. Across nine multi-head pretrained models (5,408 heads, 124M to 6.9B parameters), an earlier-position causal null accounts for 48% to 63% of the head-value cosine alignment, with no monotone scale trend. Under grouped-query attention, this alignment is specific to each head's own key-value group and reverses across groups (+0.24 to +0.27 within-group, -0.11 to -0.19 across-group). Split-half reliability demonstrates that the per-head intervention effect is resolvable in GPT-2 ($r_\Delta = 0.80$) but attenuated in Pythia-160M (0.42) and Pythia-410M (0.53), whereas structural self-cosine reliability is near-perfect in all three ($r_{\text{stat}} > 0.99$); which statistic predicts its own intervention is model-dependent. In a pre-registered 3-arm by 8-seed paired factorial at $4.0 \times 10^8$ tokens per run (399,900,672 tokens), a fixed arbitrary rank-one direction does not differ from baseline (+0.0011 nats, $p = 0.197$), while self-directed removal lowers validation loss (-0.0029 nats, Holm-corrected $p = 0.0023$) and outperforms the fixed arbitrary control directly (-0.0040 nats, $p = 0.0018$). At 50.9M scale the training benefit requires the own-value direction rather than a fixed arbitrary one, but a large cosine alignment alone does not establish redundancy in frozen models.

Abstract (translated)

URL

https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.13543

PDF

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2611.13543.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