MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7102431179

Key and Value Weights Are Probably All You Need: On the Necessity of the Query, Key, Value weight Triplet in Encoder-Only and Decoder-Only Transformers

2025· article· W7102431179 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueInstitut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique (INRIA)Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction
KeywordsDisjoint setsWeight functionQuadratic equationScalingFunction (biology)TransformerStability (learning theory)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We theoretically investigate whether the Query, Key, Value weight triplet can be reduced in encoder-only and decoder-only transformers. Under mild assumptions, we prove that one of the Query, Key or Value weights are redundant and can be replaced with the identity matrix, reducing attention parameters by 25\%. If applied to the Query or Key weights, this also simplifies optimization: attention logits depend on a single learned weight matrix rather than on a product of two. Validating the Query weight removal on decoder-only GPT-style small models trained from scratch, we find that reduced models match baseline performance despite fewer parameters, and outperform baselines when saved parameters are reallocated. Our analysis has also led us to a structural expressivity boundary: in the mathematically tractable ReLU setting, skip connections push MLPs into a generically disjoint function class at fixed width. These findings motivate investigation across modalities and at scale, where the observed stability and efficiency gains may prove most consequential.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.008
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207