Recurrent Linear Transformers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The self-attention mechanism in the transformer architecture is capable of capturing long-range dependencies and it is the main reason behind its effectiveness in processing sequential data. Nevertheless, despite their success, transformers have two significant drawbacks that still limit their broader applicability: (1) In order to remember past information, the self-attention mechanism requires access to the whole history to be provided as context. (2) The inference cost in transformers is expensive. In this paper we introduce recurrent alternatives to the transformer self-attention mechanism that offer a context-independent inference cost, leverage long-range dependencies effectively, and perform well in practice. We evaluate our approaches in reinforcement learning problems where the aforementioned computational limitations make the application of transformers nearly infeasible. We quantify the impact of the different components of our architecture in a diagnostic environment and assess performance gains in 2D and 3D pixel-based partially-observable environments. When compared to a state-of-the-art architecture, GTrXL, inference in our approach is at least 40% cheaper while reducing memory use in more than 50%. Our approach either performs similarly or better than GTrXL, improving more than 37% upon GTrXL performance on harder tasks.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.007 |
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 teacher head, 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".