Stiefel Attention: When the Geometry of Transformer Projection Matrices Dominates Optimizer Choice---and When It Does Not
Abstract
The query and key projections $\WQ,\WK$ in attention are almost always trained by Euclidean optimizers with no geometric constraint. We constrain them to the Stiefel manifold and optimize with a Riemannian Adam carrying one scalar second moment per frame---the form of \citet{becigneul2019}, here extended to the compact, non-Hadamard $\St(d,r)$ with a tangent projector, step-norm cap, and polar retraction. Four propositions prove steepest descent in the embedded metric, gradient-scale independence, well-conditioning, and exact $\mathrm{O}(d)$-equivariance. A fifth records that weight decay has \emph{identically zero} Riemannian gradient on $\St(d,r)$ ($W{=}WI_r$ lies in the normal space), so decay cannot act on the constrained frames. On a CIFAR-10 patch benchmark at $n{=}10\mathrm{k}$ this rule gains $\mathbf{+6.79}$\,pp over AdamW across 12 paired starts ($t{=}38.33$, $12/12$); earlier fixed-step Riemannian SGD gains $+1.97$\,pp, of which $+1.69$\,pp comes from frozen orthonormal initialization alone. The corrected Adam's lead grows with data: $+1.9$\,pp at $n{=}1\mathrm{k}$ to $+6.7$\,pp at $n{=}50\mathrm{k}$. A 12-seed ablation credits all gain to the scale-free step ($+4.63$\,pp, $12/12$), nothing to the projector or equivariance; a targeted $\varepsilon$-sweep causally confirms the mechanism ($-2.6$\,pp at $\varepsilon{=}0.1$, $p{<}0.001$). Two five-seed grokking studies confirm the constrained arm does not grok better than the baseline ($p{=}0.019$, A2 wins): the weight-decay exemption has no grokking consequence. A single-seed pilot exploiting this localization achieves the first stable grokking under slingshot conditions---Stiefel + targeted circuit regularization keeps routing-frame isometry error $10^6\times$ lower t
