Choosing the Number of Attention Heads from Intrinsic Dimension: A Small-Scale Study

cs.CL cs.LG Arjun Boya, Charan Sai Bandaru, Masthanaiah Pillimetla, Kavana Chidanandappa · Oct 14, 2026
Local to this browser
What it does
The number of attention heads in a transformer is usually set by convention or grid search. We test a simple heuristic for setting it in advance: estimate the intrinsic dimension of token representations without labels, and use roughly...
Why it matters
The evidence is narrow: two classification tasks, one small architecture, no pretrained models, and no formal link between intrinsic dimension and head count. We present the result as a practical heuristic worth testing at larger scale,...
Review status
The review hit a snag and will retry automatically. The abstract is still available below.
Community signal
0
0 up · 0 down
Sign in to vote with arrows
AI Review Review failed

Review failed. It will be retried automatically.

Abstract

The number of attention heads in a transformer is usually set by convention or grid search. We test a simple heuristic for setting it in advance: estimate the intrinsic dimension of token representations without labels, and use roughly that many heads. We estimate intrinsic dimension with a nested-dropout VAE trained on DistilBERT embeddings of WikiText-2, choosing the KL weight at the knee of the VAE's rate-distortion curve rather than by hand. This gives $k^*=9.2$ (95% CI [8.6, 9.8]). In a small 4-layer transformer trained from scratch, 10 heads and 32 heads are statistically equivalent on SST-2 and on MRPC (paired TOST over 10 seeds, $\pm1$ point margin), with 69% fewer attention parameters for the 10-head model. Training 10 heads from the start also slightly outperforms training 32 heads and pruning to 10 (0.6 points, $p=0.008$). The evidence is narrow: two classification tasks, one small architecture, no pretrained models, and no formal link between intrinsic dimension and head count. We present the result as a practical heuristic worth testing at larger scale, not as a general principle.

Challenge the Review

Pick a starting point or write your own. Challenges run in the background, so you can keep reading while the AI investigates.

No challenges yet. Disagree with the review? Ask the AI to revisit a specific claim.