Exact Attention Sensitivity and the Geometry of Transformer Stability
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We develop a sensitivity analysis for transformer attention in a geometry aligned with tokenwise computation. Our main result is the exact identity |Jτ(u)|∞→1=θ(p)/τ for the Jacobian Jτ(u) of the tempered softmax umapstosoftmax(u/τ), where θ(p)=4maxSsubseteq[L]p(S)(1-p(S)) measures how evenly the attention distribution can be bisected rather than how concentrated it is. We combine this identity with a block-∞/RMS norm under which row-stochastic attention mixing is nonexpansive. This yields a distribution-aware local Jacobian bound for multi-head attention and a sequence-length-independent Lipschitz bound on bounded input sets, with explicit dependence on width, input magnitude, temperature, and projection norms. We also identify a structural distinction between normalization placements: a pre-LN residual-sublayer Jacobian contains an additive identity term, whereas a post-LN residual-sublayer Jacobian does not. A LayerNorm projection lemma gives a sufficient condition under which the LayerNorm-only term in the post-LN expansion contracts geometrically; the condition is not tested by our experiments. Across three Pre-LN early-training runs of 774M-parameter models, attention becomes substantially more concentrated while the median lower-bound certificate for θ(p) remains near one at every sampled layer and checkpoint. This certifies near-maximal exact sensitivity for at least half of the sampled rows within each layer. A minority of rows enters a dominant-atom regime with lower exact sensitivity, consistent with the deterministic relationship between pmax and θ(p).
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Feb 2026.
Builds on
20 of 26 references.
References · 20
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
- 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 13,958
- 2023Efficient Streaming Language Models with Attention Sinkscited by 2,115
- 2017Accurate, Large Minibatch SGD: Training ImageNet in 1 Hourcited by 1,479
- 2024The FineWeb Datasets: Decanting the Web for the Finest Text Data at Scalecited by 1,104
- 2020On Layer Normalization in the Transformer Architecturecited by 906
- 2021Attention is Not All You Need: Pure Attention Loses Rank Doubly Exponentially with Depthcited by 411
- 2020Understanding the Difficulty of Training Transformerscited by 210
- 2019Fixup Initialization: Residual Learning Without Normalizationcited by 194
- 2022DeepNet: Scaling Transformers to 1,000 Layerscited by 176
- 2020The Lipschitz Constant of Self-Attentioncited by 171
- 2023Stabilizing Transformer Training by Preventing Attention Entropy Collapsecited by 154
8 more
- 2021Inductive Biases and Variable Creation in Self-Attention Mechanismscited by 144
- 2017On the Properties of the Softmax Function with Application in Game Theory and Reinforcement Learningcited by 136
- 2022Signal Propagation in Transformers: Theoretical Perspectives and the Role of Rank Collapsecited by 136
- 2023How Smooth Is Attention?cited by 44
- 2021Lipschitz Normalization for Self-Attention Layers with Application to Graph Neural Networkscited by 38
- 2023LipsFormer: Introducing Lipschitz Continuity to Vision Transformerscited by 33
- 2025Softmax is 1/2-Lipschitz: A tight bound across all ℓp normscited by 18
- 2025Pay Attention to Attention Distribution: A New Local Lipschitz Bound for Transformerscited by 10
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.