Author name cluster

William Merrill

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

5 papers

2 author rows

TMLR Journal 2026 Journal Article

The Transformer Cookbook

Andy Yang
Christopher Watson
Anton Xue
Satwik Bhattamishra
Jose Llarena
William Merrill
Emile Dos Santos Ferreira
Anej Svete

We present the transformer cookbook: a collection of techniques for directly encoding algorithms into a transformer's parameters. This work addresses the steep learning curve of such endeavors, a problem exacerbated by a fragmented literature where key results are scattered across numerous papers. In particular, we synthesize this disparate body of findings into a curated set of recipes that demonstrate how to implement everything from basic arithmetic in feed-forward layers to complex data routing via self-attention. Our mise en place of formulations is for both newcomers seeking an accessible entry point and experts in need of a systematic reference. This unified presentation of transformer constructions provides a foundation for future work spanning theoretical research in computational complexity to empirical investigations in architecture design and interpretability. We provide code implementations of each construction in numpy alongside a suite of generative unit tests.

PDF Details

ICML Conference 2024 Conference Paper

How Language Model Hallucinations Can Snowball

Muru Zhang
Ofir Press
William Merrill
Alisa Liu
Noah A. Smith

A major risk of using language models in practical applications is their tendency to hallucinate incorrect statements. Hallucinations are often attributed to knowledge gaps in LMs, but we show that LMs sometimes produce hallucinations that they can separately recognize as incorrect. To do this, we construct three question-answering datasets where LMs often state an incorrect answer which is followed by an explanation with at least one incorrect claim. Crucially, we find that GPT-3. 5, GPT-4, and LLaMA2-70B-chat can identify 67%, 87%, and 94% of these incorrect claims, respectively. We show that this phenomenon doesn’t disappear under higher temperatures sampling, beam search, and zero-shot chain-of-thought prompting. These findings reveal that LM hallucinations can snowball: early mistakes by an LM can lead to more mistakes that otherwise would not be made.

Details

ICLR Conference 2024 Conference Paper

The Expressive Power of Transformers with Chain of Thought

William Merrill
Ashish Sabharwal

Recent theoretical work has identified surprisingly simple reasoning problems, such as checking if two nodes in a graph are connected or simulating finite-state machines, that are provably unsolvable by standard transformers that answer immediately after reading their input. However, in practice, transformers' reasoning can be improved by allowing them to use a "chain of thought" or "scratchpad", i.e., generate and condition on a sequence of intermediate tokens before answering. Motivated by this, we ask: *Does such intermediate generation fundamentally extend the computational power of a decoder-only transformer?* We show that the answer is *yes*, but the amount of increase depends crucially on the amount of intermediate generation. For instance, we find that transformer decoders with a logarithmic number of decoding steps (w.r.t. the input length) push the limits of standard transformers only slightly, while a linear number of decoding steps, assuming projected pre-norm (a slight generalization of standard pre-norm), adds a clear new ability (under standard complexity conjectures): recognizing all regular languages. Our results also imply that linear steps keep transformer decoders within context-sensitive languages, and polynomial steps with generalized pre-norm make them recognize exactly the class of polynomial-time solvable problems—the first exact characterization of a type of transformers in terms of standard complexity classes. Together, this provides a nuanced framework for understanding how the length of a transformer’s chain of thought or scratchpad impacts its reasoning power.

Details

ICML Conference 2024 Conference Paper

The Illusion of State in State-Space Models

William Merrill
Jackson Petty
Ashish Sabharwal

State-space models (SSMs) have emerged as a potential alternative architecture for building large language models (LLMs) compared to the previously ubiquitous transformer architecture. One theoretical weakness of transformers is that they cannot express certain kinds of sequential computation and state tracking (Merrill & Sabharwal, 2023), which SSMs are explicitly designed to address via their close architectural similarity to recurrent neural networks (RNNs). But do SSMs truly have an advantage (over transformers) in expressive power for state tracking? Surprisingly, the answer is no. Our analysis reveals that the expressive power of SSMs is limited very similarly to transformers: SSMs cannot express computation outside the complexity class $\mathsf{TC}^0$. In particular, this means they cannot solve simple state-tracking problems like permutation composition. It follows that SSMs are provably unable to accurately track chess moves with certain notation, evaluate code, or track entities in a long narrative. To supplement our formal analysis, we report experiments showing that Mamba-style SSMs indeed struggle with state tracking. Thus, despite its recurrent formulation, the "state” in an SSM is an illusion: SSMs have similar expressiveness limitations to non-recurrent models like transformers, which may fundamentally limit their ability to solve real-world state-tracking problems.

Details

NeurIPS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

A Logic for Expressing Log-Precision Transformers

William Merrill
Ashish Sabharwal

One way to interpret the reasoning power of transformer-based language models is to describe the types of logical rules they can resolve over some input text. Recently, Chiang et al. (2023) showed that finite-precision transformer classifiers can be equivalently expressed in a generalization of first-order logic. However, finite-precision transformers are a weak transformer variant because, as we show, a single head can only attend to a constant number of tokens and, in particular, cannot represent uniform attention. Since attending broadly is a core capability for transformers, we ask whether a minimally more expressive model that can attend universally can also be characterized in logic. To this end, we analyze transformers whose forward pass is computed in $\log n$ precision on contexts of length $n$. We prove any log-precision transformer classifier can be equivalently expressed as a first-order logic sentence that, in addition to standard universal and existential quantifiers, may also contain majority-vote quantifiers. This is the tightest known upper bound and first logical characterization of log-precision transformers.

PDF Details