contextual token
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning (0.93)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning (0.93)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks > Deep Learning (0.93)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Natural Language > Large Language Model (0.93)
Scan and Snap: Understanding Training Dynamics and Token Composition in 1-layer Transformer
Transformer architectures have shown impressive performance in multiple research domains and have become the backbone of many neural network models. However, there is limited understanding on how Transformer works. In particular, with a simple predictive loss, how the representation emerges from the gradient training dynamics remains a mystery. In this paper, we analyze the SGD training dynamics for 1-layer transformer with one self-attention plus one decoder layer, for the task of next token prediction in a mathematically rigorous manner. We open the black box of the dynamic process of how the self-attention layer combines input tokens, and reveal the nature of underlying inductive bias. More specifically, with the assumption (a) no positional encoding, (b) long input sequence, and (c) the decoder layer learns faster than the self-attention layer, we prove that self-attention acts as a discriminative scanning algorithm: starting from uniform attention, it gradually attends more to key tokens that are distinct for a specific next token to be predicted, and pays less attention to common key tokens that occur across different next tokens. Among distinct tokens, it progressively drops attention weights, following the order of low to high co-occurrence between the key and the query token in the training set. Interestingly, this procedure does not lead to winner-takes-all, but decelerates due to a phase transition that is controllable by the learning rates of the two layers, leaving (almost) fixed token combination. We verify this scan and snap dynamics on synthetic and real-world data (WikiText).
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Natural Language > Large Language Model (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks > Deep Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning (0.93)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Representation & Reasoning (0.93)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks > Deep Learning (0.93)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Natural Language > Large Language Model (0.93)
Scan and Snap: Understanding Training Dynamics and Token Composition in 1-layer Transformer
Transformer architectures have shown impressive performance in multiple research domains and have become the backbone of many neural network models. However, there is limited understanding on how Transformer works. In particular, with a simple predictive loss, how the representation emerges from the gradient training dynamics remains a mystery. In this paper, we analyze the SGD training dynamics for 1-layer transformer with one self-attention plus one decoder layer, for the task of next token prediction in a mathematically rigorous manner. We open the black box of the dynamic process of how the self-attention layer combines input tokens, and reveal the nature of underlying inductive bias. More specifically, with the assumption (a) no positional encoding, (b) long input sequence, and (c) the decoder layer learns faster than the self-attention layer, we prove that self-attention acts as a discriminative scanning algorithm: starting from uniform attention, it gradually attends more to key tokens that are distinct for a specific next token to be predicted, and pays less attention to common key tokens that occur across different next tokens. Among distinct tokens, it progressively drops attention weights, following the order of low to high co-occurrence between the key and the query token in the training set. Interestingly, this procedure does not lead to winner-takes-all, but decelerates due to a phase transition that is controllable by the learning rates of the two layers, leaving (almost) fixed token combination. We verify this scan and snap dynamics on synthetic and real-world data (WikiText).
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Natural Language > Large Language Model (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks > Deep Learning (1.00)
Causal2Vec: Improving Decoder-only LLMs as Versatile Embedding Models
Lin, Ailiang, Li, Zhuoyun, Funakoshi, Kotaro, Okumura, Manabu
Decoder-only large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to build embedding models that effectively encode the semantic information of natural language texts into dense vector representations for various embedding tasks. However, many existing methods primarily focus on removing the causal attention mask in LLMs to enable bidirectional attention, potentially undermining the model's ability to extract semantic information acquired during pretraining. Additionally, leading unidirectional approaches often rely on extra input text to overcome the inherent limitations of causal attention, inevitably increasing computational costs. In this work, we propose Causal2Vec, a general-purpose embedding model tailored to enhance the performance of decoder-only LLMs without altering their original architectures or introducing significant computational overhead. Specifically, we first employ a lightweight BERT-style model to pre-encode the input text into a single Contextual token, which is then prepended to the LLM's input sequence, allowing each token to capture contextualized information even without attending to future tokens. Furthermore, to mitigate the recency bias introduced by last-token pooling and help LLMs better leverage the semantic information encoded in the Contextual token, we concatenate the last hidden states of Contextual and EOS tokens as the final text embedding. In practice, Causal2Vec achieves state-of-the-art performance on the Massive Text Embeddings Benchmark (MTEB) among models trained solely on publicly available retrieval datasets, while reducing the required sequence length by up to 85% and inference time by up to 82% compared to best-performing methods.
- Europe > Italy > Calabria > Catanzaro Province > Catanzaro (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > UAE (0.04)
- Asia > Japan > Honshū > Kantō > Tokyo Metropolis Prefecture > Tokyo (0.04)
Scan and Snap: Understanding Training Dynamics and Token Composition in 1-layer Transformer
Tian, Yuandong, Wang, Yiping, Chen, Beidi, Du, Simon
Transformer architecture has shown impressive performance in multiple research domains and has become the backbone of many neural network models. However, there is limited understanding on how it works. In particular, with a simple predictive loss, how the representation emerges from the gradient \emph{training dynamics} remains a mystery. In this paper, for 1-layer transformer with one self-attention layer plus one decoder layer, we analyze its SGD training dynamics for the task of next token prediction in a mathematically rigorous manner. We open the black box of the dynamic process of how the self-attention layer combines input tokens, and reveal the nature of underlying inductive bias. More specifically, with the assumption (a) no positional encoding, (b) long input sequence, and (c) the decoder layer learns faster than the self-attention layer, we prove that self-attention acts as a \emph{discriminative scanning algorithm}: starting from uniform attention, it gradually attends more to distinct key tokens for a specific next token to be predicted, and pays less attention to common key tokens that occur across different next tokens. Among distinct tokens, it progressively drops attention weights, following the order of low to high co-occurrence between the key and the query token in the training set. Interestingly, this procedure does not lead to winner-takes-all, but decelerates due to a \emph{phase transition} that is controllable by the learning rates of the two layers, leaving (almost) fixed token combination. We verify this \textbf{\emph{scan and snap}} dynamics on synthetic and real-world data (WikiText).
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Natural Language > Large Language Model (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Statistical Learning (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks > Deep Learning (1.00)