REVIEW 1 cited by
What is my math transformer doing? -- Three results on interpretability and generalization
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
This paper investigates the failure cases and out-of-distribution behavior of transformers trained on matrix inversion and eigenvalue decomposition. I show that incorrect model predictions still retain deep mathematical properties of the solution (e.g. correct eigenvalues, unit norm of eigenvectors), and that almost all model failures can be attributed to, and predicted from, properties of the problem or solution. This demonstrates that, when in doubt, math transformers do not hallucinate absurd solutions (as was sometimes proposed) but remain ``roughly right''. I also show that the careful choice of a training dataset can accelerate training, while allowing the model to generalize out of its training distribution, invalidating the idea that transformers ``merely interpolate'' from memorized examples.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Generating particle physics Lagrangians with transformers
A BART transformer can generate gauge-invariant Lagrangians from field content with over 90% accuracy on in-distribution data, though its performance drops on realistic Standard Model benchmarks.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.