Transformers with Competitive Ensembles of Independent Mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An important development in deep learning from the earliest MLPs has been a move towards architectures with structural inductive biases which enable the model to keep distinct sources of information and routes of processing well-separated. This structure is linked to the notion of independent mechanisms from the causality literature, in which a mechanism is able to retain the same processing as irrelevant aspects of the world are changed. For example, convnets enable separation over positions, while attention-based architectures (especially Transformers) learn which combination of positions to process dynamically. In this work we explore a way in which the Transformer architecture is deficient: it represents each position with a large monolithic hidden representation and a single set of parameters which are applied over the entire hidden representation. This potentially throws unrelated sources of information together, and limits the Transformer's ability to capture independent mechanisms. To address this, we propose Transformers with Independent Mechanisms (TIM), a new Transformer layer which divides the hidden representation and parameters into multiple mechanisms, which only exchange information through attention. Additionally, we propose a competition mechanism which encourages these mechanisms to specialize over time steps, and thus be more independent. We study TIM on a large-scale BERT model, on the Image Transformer, and on speech enhancement and find evidence for semantically meaningful specialization as well as improved performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".