Abstract:In context learning (ICL) is an attractive method of solving a wide range of problems. Inspired by Garg et al. (2022), we look closely at ICL in a variety of train and test settings for several transformer models of different sizes trained from scratch. Our study complements prior work by pointing out several systematic failures of these models to generalize to data not in the training distribution, thereby showing some limitations of ICL. We find that models adopt a strategy for this task that is very different from standard solutions.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is: re - examine whether small - scale language models based on the Transformer architecture can learn linear functions through in - context learning (ICL) under different training and testing settings. Specifically, the author explores the performance of these models when performing ICL, especially how they handle new data outside the training data distribution, and reveals some limitations of existing methods.
### Main problems
1. **Limitations of in - context learning**:
- Existing research shows that some Transformer models can learn linear functions in context, but these studies usually focus on simple tasks and small - scale models. The author of this paper hopes to gain a deeper understanding of whether these models can effectively perform ICL in a broader range of scenarios.
2. **Insufficient generalization ability**:
- The author finds that although some models perform well on data with a specific distribution, their performance drops significantly when facing data outside the training distribution. For example, all the Transformer models tested are unable to correctly learn strictly monotonically increasing or decreasing linear functions, especially in larger intervals.
3. **Boundary value phenomenon**:
- There is a "boundary value" phenomenon in the model's prediction, that is, when the input value exceeds a certain range, the model's prediction performance drops sharply. This indicates that the model has not really learned the linear regression algorithm but relies on the projection of similar sequences in the training data.
4. **Importance of the attention mechanism**:
- The research also explores the role of the attention mechanism in ICL. The results show that at least two attention layers are required to achieve effective ICL, and more attention heads help improve performance.
### Formula and experimental design
To evaluate the performance of the model, the author uses the following formula to define the autoregressive objective function:
\[
\theta^* = \arg \min_{\theta} \mathbb{E}_{x_i \in D_I, f \in D_F} \left[ \sum_{i = 0}^{k} l(f(x_{i + 1}), L_\theta((x_1, f(x_1),..., f(x_i), x_{i + 1}))) \right]
\]
where:
- \( L_\theta \) is the learner,
- \( l(y,\hat{y})=\| y - \hat{y} \|^2 \) is the squared - error loss function,
- \( f(x)=ax + b \) is a linear function, and \( a \) and \( b \) are randomly selected according to the training distribution.
### Conclusions
Through the analysis of experimental results under different distributions, the author draws the following conclusions:
- The model has not really achieved linear regression but makes projection adjustments based on the training data.
- The attention mechanism is crucial for ICL, but even models with multi - layer attention mechanisms show obvious limitations when facing data outside the training distribution.
- There is a "boundary value" phenomenon, indicating that the model's learning method depends on the data it has seen rather than real mathematical calculations.
In general, this paper reveals the limitations of current Transformer models in in - context learning and provides an important reference direction for future research.