Which Question Is Your Attention Metric Answering? Attention Rows as Compositional Data
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
[2608.14712] Which Question Is Your Attention Metric Answering? Attention Rows as Compositional Data Skip to main content Search Submit Donate Log in Search arXiv Press Enter to search · Advanced search Computer Science > Computation and Language arXiv:2608.14712 (cs) [Submitted on 11 Aug 2026] Title: Which Question Is Your Attention Metric Answering? Attention Rows as Compositional Data Authors: Marios Papamichalis , Regina Ruane View a PDF of the paper titled Which Question Is Your Attention Metric Answering? Attention Rows as Compositional Data, by Marios Papamichalis and 1 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract: Each row of a transformer's attention matrix is a probability distribution over tokens, and in trained models most of that probability lands on a single \emph{sink} token, usually the first. Standard tools for comparing attention rows (cosine similarity, Jensen--Shannon divergence, Shannon entropy) therefore hinge on a choice papers rarely report: keep the sink, or drop it and renormalize. This choice can reverse conclusions. On ten pretrained models from five families, 17--47% of verdicts about which of two heads is more similar flip with the convention, and the most prominent structure in a standard BERT head-clustering pipeline is an artifact of it. The reason is that one-number summaries mix two questions: how much attention the sink takes, and how the rest is divided among the content tokens. Treating rows as compositional data separates them exactly: the Aitchison distance splits orthogonally into a sink term and a content term, entropy splits by an exact identity, and the content distance is characterized by invariances the transformer itself possesses. The separation matters in practice: most measured entropy collapse during training is the sink growing, not attention sharpening (30% of the drop at 70M parameters, 95% at 1B, 79% at 1.4B), and pruning heads with the wrong channel can inflate perplexity more than a hundredfold. We map where each convention is safe, test a frozen out-of-sample predictor (one confirmation, one abstention, one failure), and release code regenerating every number. Comments: Preprint under submission Subjects: Computation and Language (cs.CL) ; Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG); Statistics Theory (math.ST) Cite as: arXiv:2608.14712 [cs.CL] (or arXiv:2608.14712v1 [cs.CL] for this version) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.14712 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite Submission history From: Marios Papamichalis Dr [ view email ] [v1] Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:44:01 UTC (565 KB) Full-text links: Access Paper: View a PDF of the paper titled Which Question Is Your Attention Metric Answering? Attention Rows as Compositional Data, by Marios Papamichalis and 1 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) TeX Source view license Current browse context: cs.CL < prev | next > new | recent | 2026-08 Change to browse by: cs cs.AI cs.LG math math.ST stat stat.TH References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar export BibTeX citation Loading... BibTeX formatted citation × loading... Data provided by: Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer ( What is the Explorer? ) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers ( What is Connected Papers? ) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps ( What is Litmaps? ) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations ( What are Smart Citations? ) Code, Data, Media Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article alphaXiv Toggle alphaXiv ( What is alphaXiv? ) Links to Code Toggle CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers ( What is CatalyzeX? ) DagsHub Toggle DagsHub ( What is DagsHub? ) GotitPub Toggle Gotit.pub ( What is GotitPub? ) Huggingface Toggle Hugging Face ( What is Huggingface? ) ScienceCast Toggle ScienceCast ( What is ScienceCast? ) Demos Demos Replicate Toggle Replicate ( What is Replicate? ) Spaces Toggle Hugging Face Spaces ( What is Spaces? ) Spaces Toggle TXYZ.AI ( What is TXYZ.AI? ) Related Papers Recommenders and Search Tools Link to Influence Flower Influence Flower ( What are Influence Flowers? ) Core recommender toggle CORE Recommender ( What is CORE? ) Author Venue Institution Topic About arXivLabs arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website. Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs . Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax ( What is MathJax? ) We gratefully acknowledge support from our major funders , member institutions , , and all contributors. About · Help · Contact · Subscribe · Copyright · Privacy · Accessibility · Operational Status (opens in new tab) Major funding support from
Related documents
- A Unified Vision-Language Model for PSMA PET/CT Report Generation, Visual Question Answering, and Lesion Segmentation#1109590
- Attention Is All You Need#7288
- BindCLIP: One Balanced Coupling For Compositional Vision Language Scoring#1049453
- Can Compositionality Solve the Thought-or-Language Problem?#94355
- RESPECTING CONTEXT: ADAPTIVE APPROACHES TO CONTEXTUAL REPRESENTATION LEARNING#424431
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive