Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Quantifying Context Mixing in Transformers

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

arxiv 2301.12971 v2 pith:NLJLZ5X5 submitted 2023-01-30 cs.CL cs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.LG
keywords encodermixinganalysiscontextinformationlayermodelsother
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Self-attention weights and their transformed variants have been the main source of information for analyzing token-to-token interactions in Transformer-based models. But despite their ease of interpretation, these weights are not faithful to the models' decisions as they are only one part of an encoder, and other components in the encoder layer can have considerable impact on information mixing in the output representations. In this work, by expanding the scope of analysis to the whole encoder block, we propose Value Zeroing, a novel context mixing score customized for Transformers that provides us with a deeper understanding of how information is mixed at each encoder layer. We demonstrate the superiority of our context mixing score over other analysis methods through a series of complementary evaluations with different viewpoints based on linguistically informed rationales, probing, and faithfulness analysis.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Do All Autoregressive Transformers Remember Facts the Same Way? A Cross-Architecture Analysis of Recall Mechanisms

    cs.CL 2025-09 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Qwen-family language models recall facts mainly through early attention layers, while GPT and LLaMA models recall facts through early MLP layers.

  2. Attention Illuminates LLM Reasoning: The Preplan-and-Anchor Rhythm Enables Fine-Grained Policy Optimization

    cs.CL 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLM attention maps reveal a preplan-and-anchor pattern, and reweighting RL credit toward the flagged tokens improves math/QA reasoning.

  3. What are you sinking? A geometric approach on attention sink

    cs.LG 2025-08 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Attention sinks in transformers are reinterpreted as geometric reference frames, with three architecture-dependent types: centralized, distributed, and bidirectional.

Pith tools