SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 1808.05578

LARNN: Linear Attention Recurrent Neural Network

Abstract

The Linear Attention Recurrent Neural Network (LARNN) is a recurrent attention module derived from the Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) cell and ideas from the consciousness Recurrent Neural Network (RNN). Yes, it LARNNs. The LARNN uses attention on its past cell state values for a limited window size $k$. The formulas are also derived from the Batch Normalized LSTM (BN-LSTM) cell and the Transformer Network for its Multi-Head Attention Mechanism. The Multi-Head Attention Mechanism is used inside the cell such that it can query its own $k$ past values with the attention window. This has the effect of augmenting the rank of the tensor with the attention mechanism, such that the cell can perform complex queries to question its previous inner memories, which should augment the long short-term effect of the memory. With a clever trick, the LARNN cell with attention can be easily used inside a loop on the cell state, just like how any other Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) cell can be looped linearly through time series. This is due to the fact that its state, which is looped upon throughout time steps within time series, stores the inner states in a "first in, first out" queue which contains the $k$ most recent states and on which it is easily possible to add static positional encoding when the queue is represented as a tensor. This neural architecture yields better results than the vanilla LSTM cells. It can obtain results of 91.92% for the test accuracy, compared to the previously attained 91.65% using vanilla LSTM cells. Note that this is not to compare to other research, where up to 93.35% is obtained, but costly using 18 LSTM cells rather than with 2 to 3 cells as analyzed here. Finally, an interesting discovery is made, such that adding activation within the multi-head attention mechanism's linear layers can yield better results in the context researched hereto.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Guillaume Chevalier. 2018-08-16. LARNN: Linear Attention Recurrent Neural Network. https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.05578

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG