CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Apr 27, 2026

Universal Transformers Need Memory: Depth-State Trade-offs in Adaptive Recursive Reasoning

arXiv AI Archived Apr 27, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2604.21999v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We study learned memory tokens as computational scratchpad for a single-block Universal Transformer (UT) with Adaptive Computation Time (ACT) on Sudoku-Extreme, a combinatorial reasoning benchmark. We find that memory tokens are empirically necessary: across all configurations tested -- 3 seeds, multiple token counts, two initialization schemes, ACT and fixed-depth processing -- no configuration without memory tokens achieves non-trivial performa

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Machine Learning [Submitted on 23 Apr 2026] Universal Transformers Need Memory: Depth-State Trade-offs in Adaptive Recursive Reasoning Grigory Sapunov We study learned memory tokens as computational scratchpad for a single-block Universal Transformer (UT) with Adaptive Computation Time (ACT) on Sudoku-Extreme, a combinatorial reasoning benchmark. We find that memory tokens are empirically necessary: across all configurations tested -- 3 seeds, multiple token counts, two initialization schemes, ACT and fixed-depth processing -- no configuration without memory tokens achieves non-trivial performance. The optimal count exhibits a sharp lower threshold (T=0 always fails, T=4 is borderline, T=8 reliably succeeds for 81-cell puzzles) followed by a stable plateau (T=8-32, 57.4% +/- 0.7% exact-match) and collapse from attention dilution at T=64. During experimentation, we identify a router initialization trap that causes >70% of training runs to fail: both default zero-bias initialization (p ~ 0.5) and Graves' recommended positive bias (p ~ 0.73) cause tokens to halt after ~2 steps at initialization, settling into a shallow equilibrium (halt ~ 5-7) that the model cannot escape. Inverting the bias to -3 ("deep start," p ~ 0.05) eliminates this failure mode. We confirm through ablation that the trap is inherent to ACT initialization, not an artifact of our architecture choices. With reliable training established, we show that (1) ACT provides more consistent results than fixed-depth processing (56.9% +/- 0.7% vs 53.4% +/- 9.3% across 3 seeds); (2) ACT with lambda warmup achieves matching accuracy (57.0% +/- 1.1%) using 34% fewer ponder steps; and (3) attention heads specialize into memory readers, constraint propagators, and integrators across recursive depth. Code is available at this https URL. Comments: 12 pages, 7 figures, 8 tables. Code: this https URL Subjects: Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL) ACM classes: I.2.6 Cite as: arXiv:2604.21999 [cs.LG]   (or arXiv:2604.21999v1 [cs.LG] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.21999 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Grigory Sapunov [view email] [v1] Thu, 23 Apr 2026 18:30:01 UTC (1,285 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.LG < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-04 Change to browse by: cs cs.AI cs.CL References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv AI
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    Apr 27, 2026
    Archived
    Apr 27, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗