On Explaining with Attention Matrices
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This paper explores the much discussed, possible explanatory link between attention weights (AW) in transformer models and predicted output. Contrary to intuition and early research on attention, more recent prior research has provided formal arguments and empirical evidence that AW are not explanatorily relevant. We show that the formal arguments are incorrect. We introduce and effectively compute efficient attention, which isolates the effective components of attention matrices in tasks and models in which AW play an explanatory role. We show that efficient attention has a causal role (provides minimally necessary and sufficient conditions) for predicting model output in NLP tasks requiring contextual information, and we show, contrary to [7], that efficient attention matrices are probability distributions and are effectively calculable. Thus, they should play an important part in the explanation of attention based model behavior. We offer empirical experiments in support of our method illustrating various properties of efficient attention with various metrics on four datasets.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Oct 2024.
Builds on
31 of 47 references.
References · 31
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2016Layer Normalizationcited by 5,669
- 2014Learning Phrase Representations using RNN Encoder-Decoder for Statistical Machine Translationcited by 4,057
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2015Character-level Convolutional Networks for Text Classificationcited by 2,330
- 2020Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Are Key-Value Memoriescited by 1,336
- 2019What Does BERT Look At? An Analysis of BERT's Attentioncited by 1,003
- 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 929
- 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 636
- 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 599
- 2019ERASER: A Benchmark to Evaluate Rationalized NLP Modelscited by 530
19 more
- 2021Causal Abstractions of Neural Networkscited by 422
- 2023Larger language models do in-context learning differentlycited by 394
- 2019Is Attention Interpretable?cited by 389
- 2019Analyzing the Structure of Attention in a Transformer Language Modelcited by 243
- 2018Statistical Aspects of Wasserstein Distancescited by 203
- 2022CRAFT: Concept Recursive Activation FacTorization for Explainabilitycited by 178
- 2022Toward Transparent AI: A Survey on Interpreting the Inner Structures of Deep Neural Networkscited by 129
- 2019Attention in Natural Language Processingcited by 101
- 2022Interpreting Language Models with Contrastive Explanationscited by 92
- 2019Attention Interpretability Across NLP Taskscited by 71
- 2022Measuring the Mixing of Contextual Information in the Transformercited by 65
- 2021Attention, please! A survey of Neural Attention Models in Deep Learningcited by 51
- 2021Incorporating Residual and Normalization Layers into Analysis of Masked Language Modelscited by 51
- 2023Explaining How Transformers Use Context to Build Predictionscited by 43
- 2021Improving the Faithfulness of Attention-based Explanations with Task-specific Information for Text Classificationcited by 29
- 2018Interpreting Recurrent and Attention-Based Neural Models: a Case Study on Natural Language Inferencecited by 26
- 2020Staying True to Your Word: (How) Can Attention Become Explanation?cited by 18
- 2020Cost-effective Interactive Attention Learning with Neural Attention Processescited by 6
- 2023Are fairness metric scores enough to assess discrimination biases in machine learning?cited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
2 papers.