mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

Gradient Flow Polarizes Softmax Outputs towards Low-Entropy Solutions

arXiv 2603.06248 ↗First posted 6 Mar 2026cs.LG math.OC stat.MLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Understanding the intricate non-convex training dynamics of softmax-based models is crucial for explaining the empirical success of transformers. In this article, we analyze the gradient flow dynamics of the value-softmax model, defined as L(V σ(a)), where V and a are a learnable value matrix and attention vector, respectively. As the matrix times softmax vector parameterization constitutes the core building block of self-attention, our analysis provides direct insight into transformer's training dynamics. We reveal that gradient flow on this structure inherently drives the optimization toward solutions characterized by low-entropy outputs. We demonstrate the universality of this polarizing effect across various objectives, including logistic and square loss. Furthermore, we discuss the practical implications of these theoretical results, offering a formal mechanism for empirical phenomena such as attention sinks and massive activations.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 30 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Mar 2026.

Builds on

30 of 39 references.

References · 30

  1. 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,379
  2. 2023Efficient Streaming Language Models with Attention Sinkscited by 2,137
  3. 2020Transformers are RNNs: Fast Autoregressive Transformers with Linear Attentioncited by 1,994
  4. 2022In-context Learning and Induction Headscited by 940
  5. 2023Vision Transformers Need Registerscited by 850
  6. 2016From Softmax to Sparsemax: A Sparse Model of Attention and Multi-Label Classificationcited by 339
  7. 2024Massive Activations in Large Language Modelscited by 283
  8. 2022cosFormer: Rethinking Softmax in Attentioncited by 212
  9. 2024When Attention Sink Emerges in Language Models: An Empirical Viewcited by 202
  10. 2018Gradient descent aligns the layers of deep linear networkscited by 182
  11. 2023Stabilizing Transformer Training by Preventing Attention Entropy Collapsecited by 157
  12. 2023Birth of a Transformer: A Memory Viewpointcited by 156
18 more
  1. 2025Why do LLMs attend to the first token?cited by 123
  2. 2024The Hedgehog & the Porcupine: Expressive Linear Attentions with Softmax Mimicrycited by 119
  3. 2024What needs to go right for an induction head? A mechanistic study of in-context learning circuits and their formationcited by 87
  4. 2024Attention Score is not All You Need for Token Importance Indicator in KV Cache Reduction: Value Also Matterscited by 72
  5. 2024Unveiling and Harnessing Hidden Attention Sinks: Enhancing Large Language Models without Training through Attention Calibrationcited by 72
  6. 2024SEED-Story: Multimodal Long Story Generation with Large Language Modelcited by 70
  7. 2024Theory, Analysis, and Best Practices for Sigmoid Self-Attentioncited by 64
  8. 2024Active-Dormant Attention Heads: Mechanistically Demystifying Extreme-Token Phenomena in LLMscited by 54
  9. 2023Replacing softmax with ReLU in Vision Transformerscited by 44
  10. 2022Implicit Bias of Gradient Descent on Reparametrized Models: On Equivalence to Mirror Descentcited by 38
  11. 2025How do language models learn facts? Dynamics, curricula and hallucinationscited by 36
  12. 2024Prefixing Attention Sinks can Mitigate Activation Outliers for Large Language Model Quantizationcited by 33
  13. 2025The emergence of sparse attention: impact of data distribution and benefits of repetitioncited by 25
  14. 2024Self-attention Networks Localize When QK-eigenspectrum Concentratescited by 19
  15. 2024How Sparse Attention Approximates Exact Attention? Your Attention is Naturally nC-Sparsecited by 16
  16. 2025Attention Sinks: A 'Catch, Tag, Release' Mechanism for Embeddingscited by 16
  17. 2025Learning In-context n-grams with Transformers: Sub-n-grams Are Near-stationary Pointscited by 16
  18. 2015Opinion Dynamics in Social Networks with Hostile Camps: Consensus vs. Polarizationcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 13 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.