One of the weird things you do in transformers is add a position vector which captures the distance between the token being attended to the some other token.
This is obviously not powerful enough to express non-linear relationships - like graph relationships.
This person seems to be experimenting with doing pre-processing of the input token set, to linearly reorder it by some other heuristic that might map more closely to the actual underlying relationship between each token.
As if they are not relying on the model's ability to develop its own "positional system bootstrapping on top of the barebones one."
> like graph relationships
Once upon a time during me being language modeling researcher I built and finetuned a big (at the time - about 5 billions parameters) Sparse Non-Negative Matrix Language Model [1].[1] https://aclanthology.org/Q16-1024/
As this model allows for mix-and-match of various contexts, one thing that I did is to have a word-sorted context. This effectively transforms position-based context into a word-set based context, where "you and me", "me and you" and "and me you" are the same.
This allowed for longer contexts and better prediction.
https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-long.1564/
Thanks to you both for two, interesting papers tonight. :)
I was using their model in my work.
Well, in your work, whay benefit did you get from it? And do you think it would be beneficial today combined with modern techniques? Or obsoleted by other technqiue?
(I ask because I'm finding many old techniques are still good or could be mixed with deep learning.)
I tried to apply SNMLM's ideas to the byte-level prediction modeling here: https://github.com/thesz/snmlm-per-byte
It was not bad, but I had trouble scaling it to the 1B set. Mostly because I have not enough time.
I do hold same mindset as yours, that many old techniques are misunderstood or underapplied. For example, decision trees, in my experiments, allow for bit-length-per-byte comparable to LSTM (lstm-compress or LSTM in nncp experiments): https://github.com/thesz/codeta
the distance metrics used is based on energy-informed graphs that encode energy relations in a distribution called taumode, see my previous paper on spectral indexing for vector databases for a complete roll-out
they replace dot-product attention with topology-based scalar distances derived from a laplacian embedding - that effectively reduces attention scoring to a 1D energy comparison which can save memory and compute
that said, i’d treat the results with a grain of salt give there is no peer review, and benchmarks are only on 30M parameter model so far
This may work well for their use case but fail horribly in others without further peer review and testing.
For sure, some words or feedback on what you understood (did you get it right) etc. yeah.
But otherwise, if you do not understand a research paper, you have to do the same hard work as everyone else. Sitting down, going through it paragraph by paragraph and learning it. This takes massive time.
and for a high level overview, chatgpt and co are really really good getting papers.
If you need help getting more out of ai, you can use chatgpt and co to go through papers and let yourself eli5 paragarphs. 1blue3brown also has a few great videos about transformer and how they work