This work measures how much of the weight gradient this throws away, exactly and for every k from one backward pass, on nine looped language models, and reports three findings that show a trained model's value overstates what truncation removes later.
Abstract
Looped transformers reuse one block of layers many times and are often trained by backpropagating through only the last k loops. We measure how much of the weight gradient this throws away, exactly and for every k from one backward pass, on nine looped language models, and report three findings. First, on a trained model this lost gradient is set near the output: once the loop count is well above k, it barely changes with the loop count (within about 0.03 from 32 to 64 loops on the three models we tested, as a pre-registered test predicted for Parcae). Where the backward signal shrinks, $\rho^k$, with $\rho$ the signal's fitted shrink per loop, approximates it at moderate loop counts but overstates it at long ones, because the fitted $\rho$ drifts up as the fit takes in more loops. On Ouro the signal grows, and keeping two of four loops still loses 81% of the final output's gradient. Second, the lost gradient falls during fine-tuning, by 0.07-0.22 within 300 steps on three of four models, on held-out problems too. The fall is not just the read-out's share of the gradient; training only the layers outside the loop reproduced up to half of it, and it also falls under truncated training. So a trained model's value overstates what truncation removes later. Third, we could not show that it predicts the training cost of truncation better than rules that need no measurement: on two new models it tied Parcae's cost at the same k, in a test too small to separate them.
This work jointly varies model size, training tokens, and forward and backward loop counts across nearly 600 training runs and fit a unified scaling law that captures the effects of looping and truncation through effective parameters, showing that at fixed model size, the compute-optimal loop count and training-token b...
Xu-Yuan Xiong, Si-Yu Chen, Zi-Han Shao et al.· 1 citation
The results show that effective looping requires matching the design to the resource constraint and inference setting, and that preserving the current-token embedding and separately normalizing it and the previous-token hidden state before combining them recovers strong performance across model scales and training budg...
C. Ekbote, Artidoro Pagnoni, Devendra Singh Sachan et al.· 0 citations
In in-context Mealy-machine execution, where a simulator supplies intermediate targets and exact counterfactuals for hidden-state interventions,Looped transformers compute by applying one block repeatedly, so they can run for more loops than they were trained with.
Pei-Long Zhou, Hong-Tao Zhang, Yu-Long Huang et al.· 0 citations
We introduce Loop Flow Transformers (LiFT), a family of looped generative models that scales computation by repeatedly applying a shared Diffusion Transformer (DiT) core, with only light changes to the standard architecture. Rather than asking every recurrent step for the final prediction, LiFT trains each step with a...
M. Derakhshani, Pedro M. P. Curvo, G. Burghouts et al.· 1 citation
Looped transformers have demonstrated promising parameter efficiency by reusing layers for latent computation. Prior studies compare looped and non-looped models at matched parameters or per-token FLOPs. However, to the best of our knowledge, whether looping improves test-time scaling as outputs grow longer remains und...
Yi-Chen You, Tianyu Fu, Ao-Song Feng et al.· 4 citations
This work improves the two components of training that shape these fixed points: the depth prior and input injection, and learns the prior from prediction feedback, with an entropy term that keeps it broad.