paper-with-me

홈 › Papers

SR-TTT: Surprisal-Aware Residual Test-Time Training

2026-02-26 · Swamynathan V P arxiv

Test-Time Training (TTT) language models achieve theoretically infinite context windows with an O(1) memory footprint by replacing the standard exact-attention KV-cache with hidden state ``fast weights'' W_fast updated via self-supervised learning during inference. However, pure TTT architectures suffer catastrophic failures on exact-recall tasks (e.g., Needle-in-a-Haystack). Because the fast weights aggressively compress the context into an information bottleneck, highly surprising or unique tokens are rapidly overwritten and forgotten by subsequent token gradient updates. We introduce SR-TTT (Surprisal-Aware Residual Test-Time Training), which resolves this recall failure by augmenting the TTT backbone with a loss-gated sparse memory mechanism. By dynamically routing only incompressible, highly surprising tokens to a traditional exact-attention Residual Cache, SR-TTT preserves O(1) memory for low-entropy background context while utilizing exact attention exclusively for critical needles. Our complete implementation, training scripts, and pre-trained weights are open-source and available at: https://github.com/swamynathanvp/Surprisal-Aware-Residual-Test-Time-Training.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX arXiv:2603.06642

Code (0)

등록된 구현이 없습니다.

Tasks

Self-Supervised Learning

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

Why Does Surprisal From Smaller GPT-2 Models Provide Better Fit to Human Reading Times?

2022-01-16 · ACL ARR January 2022 1 · Anonymous

This work presents an in-depth analysis of an observation that contradicts the findings of recent work in computational psycholinguistics, namely that smaller GPT-2 models that show higher test perplexity nonetheless gen…

regression

Words, Subwords, and Morphemes: What Really Matters in the Surprisal-Reading Time Relationship?

2023-10-26 · Sathvik Nair, Philip Resnik

An important assumption that comes with using LLMs on psycholinguistic data has gone unverified. LLM-based predictions are based on subword tokenization, not decomposition of words into morphemes. Does that matter? We ca…

Why Does Surprisal From Larger Transformer-Based Language Models Provide a Poorer Fit to Human Reading Times?

2022-12-23 · Byung-Doh Oh, William Schuler

This work presents a detailed linguistic analysis into why larger Transformer-based pre-trained language models with more parameters and lower perplexity nonetheless yield surprisal estimates that are less predictive of …

Testing the Predictions of Surprisal Theory in 11 Languages

2023-07-07 · Ethan Gotlieb Wilcox, Tiago Pimentel, Clara Meister, Ryan Cotterell 외

A fundamental result in psycholinguistics is that less predictable words take a longer time to process. One theoretical explanation for this finding is Surprisal Theory (Hale, 2001; Levy, 2008), which quantifies a word's…

Frequency Explains the Inverse Correlation of Large Language Models' Size, Training Data Amount, and Surprisal's Fit to Reading Times

2024-02-03 · Byung-Doh Oh, Shisen Yue, William Schuler

Recent studies have shown that as Transformer-based language models become larger and are trained on very large amounts of data, the fit of their surprisal estimates to naturalistic human reading times degrades. The curr…

Language Modelling