REVIEW 2 cited by
Do language models plan ahead for future tokens?
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
abstract
Do transformers "think ahead" during inference at a given position? It is known transformers prepare information in the hidden states of the forward pass at time step $t$ that is then used in future forward passes $t+\tau$. We posit two explanations for this phenomenon: pre-caching, in which off-diagonal gradient terms present during training result in the model computing features at $t$ irrelevant to the present inference task but useful for the future, and breadcrumbs, in which features most relevant to time step $t$ are already the same as those that would most benefit inference at time $t+\tau$. We test these hypotheses by training language models without propagating gradients to past timesteps, a scheme we formalize as myopic training. In a constructed synthetic data setting, we find clear evidence for pre-caching. In the autoregressive language modeling setting, our experiments are more suggestive of the breadcrumbs hypothesis, though pre-caching increases with model scale.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Understanding the learned look-ahead behavior of chess neural networks
The Leela Chess Zero policy network encodes information about destination squares of moves up to seven plies ahead, with attention heads that copy future-square information backward in time in a pattern-dependent way.
-
Large Language Models for Planning: A Comprehensive and Systematic Survey
A structured survey of LLM planning methods, benchmarks, and interpretability work, organized around a three-way taxonomy.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.