On the Trade-off Between Information Loss and Generalization in Sparse Attention
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
To mitigate the quadratic complexity bottleneck of the Transformer, sparse attention has emerged as a pivotal technology. Despite the extensive empirical success of sparse Transformers, the theoretical understanding of sparse attention remains fragmented. In particular, two fundamental questions remain unclear: (1) How does sparsification affect the information fidelity of attention mechanisms? (2) How does this information loss interact with the generalization behavior of the model? To bridge this gap, this paper proposes a systematic analysis of the Jensen-Shannon (JS) divergence and of the generalization gap of sparse attention mechanisms. Specifically, we first characterize the approximation error via the JS divergence. Through an order-statistics-based concentration analysis of the truncation mass alpha --- where the attention scores are assumed to be independent and identically distributed sub-Gaussian random variables with parameter sigma --- the JS divergence between the full attention distribution and the sparse attention distribution is shown to admit the closed form log 2 + ((1 - alpha)/2) log(1 - alpha) - ((2 - alpha)/2) log(2 - alpha). Subsequently, we derive a generalization bound through Rademacher complexity, quantified by O(gamma * sqrt(M/n) * (sqrt(log(3eL/M)) + sqrt(pi)/2)). Furthermore, building on a mutual-information-based generalization bound together with an entropy and covering-number analysis of the sparse hypothesis class, we obtain the sparsity-dependent generalization bound O(sqrt((M/(2n)) * (log(eL/M) + log(1 + 2/epsilon)))). Our analysis shows that sparsity reduces the complexity of the considered hypothesis class while introducing approximation error that can be quantified by the JS divergence. These findings provide a theoretical characterization of the trade-off between information fidelity and generalization in sparse Transformer architectures.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Oct 2026.
Builds on
28 of 35 references.
References · 28
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 30,186
- 2016Layer Normalizationcited by 5,669
- 2020Longformer: The Long-Document Transformercited by 3,413
- 2020Big Bird: Transformers for Longer Sequencescited by 1,684
- 2016Understanding deep learning requires rethinking generalizationcited by 1,674
- 2020Reformer: The Efficient Transformercited by 1,668
- 2019Generating Long Sequences with Sparse Transformerscited by 1,546
- 2020Linformer: Self-Attention with Linear Complexitycited by 1,474
- 2018Learning deep representations by mutual information estimation and maximizationcited by 1,273
- 2020Efficient Content-Based Sparse Attention with Routing Transformerscited by 471
- 2025Native Sparse Attention: Hardware-Aligned and Natively Trainable Sparse Attentioncited by 407
16 more
- 2017Information-theoretic analysis of generalization capability of learning algorithmscited by 303
- 2023Stabilizing Transformer Training by Preventing Attention Entropy Collapsecited by 161
- 2020O(n) Connections are Expressive Enough: Universal Approximability of Sparse Transformerscited by 83
- 2021On the Expressive Power of Self-Attention Matricescited by 47
- 2024Theoretical limitations of multi-layer Transformercited by 45
- 2023Sequence Length Independent Norm-Based Generalization Bounds for Transformerscited by 29
- 2025The Sparse Frontier: Sparse Attention Trade-offs in Transformer LLMscited by 29
- 2025Softmax is 1/2-Lipschitz: A tight bound across all ℓp normscited by 22
- 2025HybridNorm: Towards Stable and Efficient Transformer Training via Hybrid Normalizationcited by 16
- 2025Taming Transformer Without Using Learning Rate Warmupcited by 9
- 2025Graph-Aware Isomorphic Attention for Adaptive Dynamics in Transformerscited by 7
- 2024On the Benefits of Rank in Attention Layerscited by 5
- 2025Connecting Jensen-Shannon and Kullback-Leibler Divergences: A New Bound for Representation Learningcited by 4
- 2026Lil: Less is Less When Applying Post-Training Sparse-Attention Algorithms in Long-Decode Stagecited by 3
- 2026Generalization Bounds for Transformer Channel Decoderscited by 2
- 2026Rank-Aware Spectral Bounds on Attention Logits for Stable Low-Precision Trainingcited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.