<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Quantizable Transformers: Removing Outliers by Helping Attention Heads Do Nothing · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2306.12929/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2306.12929/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Quantizable Transformers: Removing Outliers by Helping Attention Heads Do Nothing — mentioned by Imnimo</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36853295</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2306.12929:36853295</guid><pubDate>Mon, 24 Jul 2023 19:48:15 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Right, I get the goal of removing the outlier activations, but I just don&amp;#x27;t understand why outlier activations are a consequence of the model trying to &amp;quot;pass&amp;quot;. The story from the linked paper earlier in the post (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2306.12929.pdf) is that the model is doing the following: -Learn a near-zero representation for some otherwise low-importance token, like delimiters or whitespace. -When a head wants to &amp;quot;pass&amp;quot;, emit an outlier activation to attend to that token nearly-exclusively. But I&amp;#x27;m surprised the model can&amp;#x27;t just use its existing tools (the post-concat projection layer and…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2306.12929/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LG</category></item></channel></rss>
