mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Why and when should you pool? Analyzing Pooling in Recurrent Architectures

arXiv 2005.00159 ↗First posted 1 May 2020cs.CL cs.LGcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Pooling-based recurrent neural architectures consistently outperform their counterparts without pooling. However, the reasons for their enhanced performance are largely unexamined. In this work, we examine three commonly used pooling techniques (mean-pooling, max-pooling, and attention), and propose max-attention, a novel variant that effectively captures interactions among predictive tokens in a sentence. We find that pooling-based architectures substantially differ from their non-pooling equivalents in their learning ability and positional biases--which elucidate their performance benefits. By analyzing the gradient propagation, we discover that pooling facilitates better gradient flow compared to BiLSTMs. Further, we expose how BiLSTMs are positionally biased towards tokens in the beginning and the end of a sequence. Pooling alleviates such biases. Consequently, we identify settings where pooling offers large benefits: (i) in low resource scenarios, and (ii) when important words lie towards the middle of the sentence. Among the pooling techniques studied, max-attention is the most effective, resulting in significant performance gains on several text classification tasks.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 1 May 2020.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 1.

2 papers.