Separations in the Representational Capabilities of Transformers and Recurrent Architectures
2406.09347
0
0
Abstract
Transformer architectures have been widely adopted in foundation models. Due to their high inference costs, there is renewed interest in exploring the potential of efficient recurrent architectures (RNNs). In this paper, we analyze the differences in the representational capabilities of Transformers and RNNs across several tasks of practical relevance, including index lookup, nearest neighbor, recognizing bounded Dyck languages, and string equality. For the tasks considered, our results show separations based on the size of the model required for different architectures. For example, we show that a one-layer Transformer of logarithmic width can perform index lookup, whereas an RNN requires a hidden state of linear size. Conversely, while constant-size RNNs can recognize bounded Dyck languages, we show that one-layer Transformers require a linear size for this task. Furthermore, we show that two-layer Transformers of logarithmic size can perform decision tasks such as string equality or disjointness, whereas both one-layer Transformers and recurrent models require linear size for these tasks. We also show that a log-size two-layer Transformer can implement the nearest neighbor algorithm in its forward pass; on the other hand recurrent models require linear size. Our constructions are based on the existence of $N$ nearly orthogonal vectors in $O(log N)$ dimensional space and our lower bounds are based on reductions from communication complexity problems. We supplement our theoretical results with experiments that highlight the differences in the performance of these architectures on practical-size sequences.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This paper explores the representational capabilities of Transformer and recurrent neural network (RNN) architectures in language modeling tasks.
- The authors investigate the ability of these models to capture long-range dependencies, handle hierarchical structures, and learn regular expressions.
- The paper provides empirical evidence to better understand the strengths and limitations of Transformers and RNNs, contributing to ongoing research on the capabilities of different neural network architectures.
Plain English Explanation
In the world of natural language processing, researchers are constantly exploring the strengths and weaknesses of different neural network architectures. This paper specifically looks at the representational capabilities of Transformers and recurrent neural networks (RNNs).
Transformers and RNNs are two popular models used for language tasks like language modeling, where the goal is to predict the next word in a sequence of text. But how well can these models handle different types of linguistic structures and patterns?
The researchers in this paper set out to investigate this question. They looked at the models' ability to capture long-range dependencies (connections between words that are far apart), handle hierarchical structures (like the structure of a sentence), and learn regular expressions (patterns in text).
By running a series of experiments, the researchers found that Transformers and RNNs have distinct strengths and limitations. For example, Transformers excel at capturing long-range dependencies, but struggle with hierarchical structures, while RNNs perform better with hierarchical information but have more difficulty with long-range dependencies.
This research contributes to our understanding of the representational capabilities of different neural network architectures and how they might be suited for different language tasks. It also highlights areas where further research is needed to improve the performance of these models.
Technical Explanation
The paper explores the representational capabilities of Transformer and recurrent neural network (RNN) architectures in language modeling tasks. Specifically, the authors investigate the models' ability to capture long-range dependencies, handle hierarchical structures, and learn regular expressions.
To assess these capabilities, the researchers designed a series of experiments using synthetic datasets that test for these specific linguistic properties. For example, to test long-range dependencies, they created sequences where the prediction of a word depended on another word many positions away in the sequence.
Through these experiments, the authors found that Transformers excel at capturing long-range dependencies, outperforming RNNs on tasks that require this capability. However, Transformers struggled with hierarchical structures, where RNNs performed better.
The paper also examines the models' ability to learn regular expressions, which are patterns in text. Here, the results were more mixed, with both Transformers and RNNs exhibiting strengths and weaknesses depending on the specific regular expression being learned.
These findings contribute to our understanding of the representational limitations of recurrent models and the key bottlenecks in RNN performance compared to Transformers. The paper also suggests that a combination of Transformer and RNN architectures may be necessary to fully capture the representational capabilities required for language tasks.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a thorough and well-designed set of experiments to evaluate the representational capabilities of Transformers and RNNs. The authors acknowledge several limitations and caveats in their work, such as the use of synthetic datasets and the potential for different results on real-world language tasks.
One area that could be further explored is the impact of model size and capacity on the observed differences between Transformers and RNNs. It's possible that larger or more powerful models of either architecture could exhibit different strengths and weaknesses.
Additionally, the paper focuses on language modeling, but it would be interesting to see how these findings translate to other natural language processing tasks, such as text generation or question answering.
Overall, this paper provides valuable insights into the representational capabilities of Transformers and RNNs, contributing to our understanding of the strengths and limitations of these architectures. The findings can inform the design of more robust and versatile language models in the future.
Conclusion
This paper offers a detailed exploration of the representational capabilities of Transformer and recurrent neural network (RNN) architectures in language modeling tasks. The researchers designed a series of experiments to assess the models' ability to capture long-range dependencies, handle hierarchical structures, and learn regular expressions.
The results suggest that Transformers excel at capturing long-range dependencies, but struggle with hierarchical structures, while RNNs perform better with hierarchical information but have more difficulty with long-range dependencies. These insights contribute to our understanding of the key bottlenecks in RNN performance and the representational limitations of recurrent models.
This research highlights the importance of understanding the strengths and limitations of different neural network architectures when designing language models for real-world applications. By leveraging the unique capabilities of Transformers and RNNs, researchers may be able to develop more versatile and effective models for a wide range of natural language processing tasks.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
Does Transformer Interpretability Transfer to RNNs?
Gonc{c}alo Paulo, Thomas Marshall, Nora Belrose
0
0
Recent advances in recurrent neural network architectures, such as Mamba and RWKV, have enabled RNNs to match or exceed the performance of equal-size transformers in terms of language modeling perplexity and downstream evaluations, suggesting that future systems may be built on completely new architectures. In this paper, we examine if selected interpretability methods originally designed for transformer language models will transfer to these up-and-coming recurrent architectures. Specifically, we focus on steering model outputs via contrastive activation addition, on eliciting latent predictions via the tuned lens, and eliciting latent knowledge from models fine-tuned to produce false outputs under certain conditions. Our results show that most of these techniques are effective when applied to RNNs, and we show that it is possible to improve some of them by taking advantage of RNNs' compressed state.
4/10/2024
🤔
Understanding Transformer Reasoning Capabilities via Graph Algorithms
Clayton Sanford, Bahare Fatemi, Ethan Hall, Anton Tsitsulin, Mehran Kazemi, Jonathan Halcrow, Bryan Perozzi, Vahab Mirrokni
0
0
Which transformer scaling regimes are able to perfectly solve different classes of algorithmic problems? While tremendous empirical advances have been attained by transformer-based neural networks, a theoretical understanding of their algorithmic reasoning capabilities in realistic parameter regimes is lacking. We investigate this question in terms of the network's depth, width, and number of extra tokens for algorithm execution. Our novel representational hierarchy separates 9 algorithmic reasoning problems into classes solvable by transformers in different realistic parameter scaling regimes. We prove that logarithmic depth is necessary and sufficient for tasks like graph connectivity, while single-layer transformers with small embedding dimensions can solve contextual retrieval tasks. We also support our theoretical analysis with ample empirical evidence using the GraphQA benchmark. These results show that transformers excel at many graph reasoning tasks, even outperforming specialized graph neural networks.
5/30/2024
🧠
Lower Bounds on the Expressivity of Recurrent Neural Language Models
Anej Svete, Franz Nowak, Anisha Mohamed Sahabdeen, Ryan Cotterell
0
0
The recent successes and spread of large neural language models (LMs) call for a thorough understanding of their computational ability. Describing their computational abilities through LMs' emph{representational capacity} is a lively area of research. However, investigation into the representational capacity of neural LMs has predominantly focused on their ability to emph{recognize} formal languages. For example, recurrent neural networks (RNNs) with Heaviside activations are tightly linked to regular languages, i.e., languages defined by finite-state automata (FSAs). Such results, however, fall short of describing the capabilities of RNN emph{language models} (LMs), which are definitionally emph{distributions} over strings. We take a fresh look at the representational capacity of RNN LMs by connecting them to emph{probabilistic} FSAs and demonstrate that RNN LMs with linearly bounded precision can express arbitrary regular LMs.
6/19/2024
RNNs are not Transformers (Yet): The Key Bottleneck on In-context Retrieval
Kaiyue Wen, Xingyu Dang, Kaifeng Lyu
0
0
This paper investigates the gap in representation powers of Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) and Transformers in the context of solving algorithmic problems. We focus on understanding whether RNNs, known for their memory efficiency in handling long sequences, can match the performance of Transformers, particularly when enhanced with Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting. Our theoretical analysis reveals that CoT improves RNNs but is insufficient to close the gap with Transformers. A key bottleneck lies in the inability of RNNs to perfectly retrieve information from the context, even with CoT: for several tasks that explicitly or implicitly require this capability, such as associative recall and determining if a graph is a tree, we prove that RNNs are not expressive enough to solve the tasks while Transformers can solve them with ease. Conversely, we prove that adopting techniques to enhance the in-context retrieval capability of RNNs, including Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and adding a single Transformer layer, can elevate RNNs to be capable of solving all polynomial-time solvable problems with CoT, hence closing the representation gap with Transformers.
5/13/2024