Identifying and Evaluating Inactive Heads in Pretrained LLMs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Attention is foundational to large language models (LLMs), enabling different heads to have diverse focus on relevant input tokens. However, learned behaviors like attention sinks, where the first token receives the most attention despite limited semantic importance, suggest some heads may be inactive, and point to a significant source of computational redundancy. To analyze this phenomenon, we evaluate 12 score functions that measure different ways a head can be inactive. Thresholding these scores allows us to analyze different sets of potentially inactive attention heads. We evaluate whether identified heads are inactive through model interventions, finding that more than 12% of attention heads are inactive on average, and can be ablated in specific contexts while maintaining MMLU accuracy to within 1% of the pretrained LLM. Across 3 model families, our score functions that measure the average norm of a head's output consistently identify inactive heads that would not have been found by score functions that rely solely on attention weights. We establish that relying on a score function that measures a first token attention sink would underestimate the prevalence of inactive heads, failing to identify more than 7% of inactive heads on average. We also show how measuring score distributions can provide insights into attention behavior. For instance, we find evidence that finetuning causes little to no change in attention behavior, and that even within the same model family, large model scales present different attention behaviors.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Apr 2025.
Builds on
26 of 39 references.
References · 26
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
- 2019PIQA: Reasoning about Physical Commonsense in Natural Languagecited by 2,883
- 2023Efficient Streaming Language Models with Attention Sinkscited by 2,186
- 2023GQA: Training Generalized Multi-Query Transformer Models from Multi-Head Checkpointscited by 1,346
- 2024Tulu 3: Pushing Frontiers in Open Language Model Post-Trainingcited by 1,053
- 2019Analyzing Multi-Head Self-Attention: Specialized Heads Do the Heavy Lifting, the Rest Can Be Prunedcited by 856
14 more
- 2019Are Sixteen Heads Really Better than One?cited by 816
- 2019Fast Transformer Decoding: One Write-Head is All You Needcited by 717
- 2024An Image is Worth 1/2 Tokens After Layer 2: Plug-and-Play Inference Acceleration for Large Vision-Language Modelscited by 642
- 2023Model Tells You What to Discard: Adaptive KV Cache Compression for LLMscited by 474
- 2023Scissorhands: Exploiting the Persistence of Importance Hypothesis for LLM KV Cache Compression at Test Timecited by 439
- 20242 OLMo 2 Furiouscited by 340
- 2024Massive Activations in Large Language Modelscited by 294
- 2024Mixture-of-Depths: Dynamically allocating compute in transformer-based language modelscited by 258
- 2024When Attention Sink Emerges in Language Models: An Empirical Viewcited by 208
- 2024Unveiling and Harnessing Hidden Attention Sinks: Enhancing Large Language Models without Training through Attention Calibrationcited by 74
- 2024Attention Score is not All You Need for Token Importance Indicator in KV Cache Reduction: Value Also Matterscited by 73
- 2024Active-Dormant Attention Heads: Mechanistically Demystifying Extreme-Token Phenomena in LLMscited by 56
- 2024Transformer Layers as Painterscited by 54
- 2021Differentiable Subset Pruning of Transformer Headscited by 47
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 7.
8 papers.
- 2026A Mechanistic Analysis of Looped Reasoning Language Modelscited by 33
- 2026The Spike, the Sparse and the Sink: Anatomy of Massive Activations and Attention Sinkscited by 27
- 2025Forgetting to Forget: Attention Sink as A Gateway for Backdooring LLM Unlearningcited by 6
- 2026On the Nature of Attention Sink that Shapes Decoding Strategy in Omni-LLMscited by 6
- 2026Attention Sink Forges Native MoE in Attention Layers: Sink-Aware Training to Address Head Collapsecited by 5
- 2026What Makes Position Zero Special? A Mechanistic Study of Position Zero Attention Sinks in LLMscited by 3
- 2026A Unifying View of Attention Sinks: From Mechanisms to Architectural Interventionscited by 0
- 2026CoWindow Attention: Full Causal Coverage Is a Collective Propertycited by 0
- 2026CoWindow Attention: Full Causal Coverage Is a Collective Property26 Sep 2026
- 2026A Unifying View of Attention Sinks: From Mechanisms to Architectural Interventions6 Jun 2026
- 2026A Mechanistic Analysis of Looped Reasoning Language Models13 Apr 2026
- 2026On the Nature of Attention Sink that Shapes Decoding Strategy in Omni-LLMs15 Mar 2026
- 2026The Spike, the Sparse and the Sink: Anatomy of Massive Activations and Attention Sinks5 Mar 2026
- 2026What Makes Position Zero Special? A Mechanistic Study of Position Zero Attention Sinks in LLMs4 Feb 2026
- 2026Attention Sink Forges Native MoE in Attention Layers: Sink-Aware Training to Address Head Collapse1 Feb 2026
- 2025Forgetting to Forget: Attention Sink as A Gateway for Backdooring LLM Unlearning19 Oct 2025