Mixing Matters: Evidence Position Bias Across Sequence Mixers in Long-Context Question Answering

Review failed. It will be retried automatically.

Long-context models often use answer-bearing evidence less effectively when it appears away from a prompt boundary. We compare this position bias across Transformer, state-space, and hybrid Mamba architectures by moving one gold document through a fixed set of nine distractors. The evaluated Transformers show a beginning advantage that the evaluated state-space models lack, while both families favor evidence near the end. A matched pure-versus-hybrid Mamba comparison points in the same direction but remains statistically uncertain. The family difference appears among models that can answer the task. Transformer primacy reappears on synthetic retrieval, where state-space ceiling prevents a family comparison. A corpus swap within one state-space architecture changes overall accuracy without a detectable change in curve shape. Prompt changes can create or nearly remove a beginning advantage. Position remains decodable across architectures even when response curves differ, and attention concentration near initial tokens covaries with beginning sensitivity in the tested Transformer family. These exploratory results show that effective context use depends on the evaluated architecture family, capability, task, and prompt, without isolating the sequence mixer as the sole cause.

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.