Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Fundamental Limitations on Subquadratic Alternatives to 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 2410.04271 v2 pith:YNOJFTPS submitted 2024-10-05 cs.LG cs.CCcs.CL

classification cs.LGcs.CCcs.CL
keywords attentiontimeperformtransformercannotprovesubquadratictask
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The Transformer architecture is widely deployed in many popular and impactful Large Language Models. At its core is the attention mechanism for calculating correlations between pairs of tokens. Performing an attention computation takes quadratic time in the input size, and had become the time bottleneck for transformer operations. In order to circumvent this, researchers have used a variety of approaches, including designing heuristic algorithms for performing attention computations faster, and proposing alternatives to the attention mechanism which can be computed more quickly. For instance, state space models such as Mamba were designed to replace attention with an almost linear time alternative. In this paper, we prove that any such approach cannot perform important tasks that Transformer is able to perform (assuming a popular conjecture from fine-grained complexity theory). We focus on document similarity tasks, where one is given as input many documents and would like to find a pair which is (approximately) the most similar. We prove that Transformer is able to perform this task, and we prove that this task cannot be performed in truly subquadratic time by any algorithm. Thus, any model which can be evaluated in subquadratic time - whether because of subquadratic-time heuristics for attention, faster attention replacements like Mamba, or any other reason - cannot perform this task. In other words, in order to perform tasks that (implicitly or explicitly) involve document similarity, one may as well use Transformer and cannot avoid its quadratic running time.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. KV Shifting Attention Enhances Language Modeling

    cs.CL 2024-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    KV shifting attention, which mixes each token's key and value with its predecessor's, reduces the depth and width needed to implement induction heads and improves language modeling in tests up to 19B parameters.

  2. Fundamental Limits of Prompt Tuning Transformers: Universality, Capacity and Efficiency

    cs.LG 2024-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Prompt tuning on single-head, single-layer transformers is universal for Lipschitz sequence functions, and its inference speed has a norm-based phase transition under SETH.

Pith tools