Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

Depth-Staggered Fibonacci Spacing for Sparse Attention: Static Schedules Beat Learned Dilation and Extrapolate Where Dense Attention Fails

Chad A. CappsPublished Jun 26, 2026
arXiv PDF
Researcher verdict
Context only
Use as context only
Benchmark evidence
Thin evidence
Verify before relying
Time to first repro
A few days
Plan setup time
Risk flags
2
Review before use

Abstract

Domain fit: AI-core · Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.

We study sparse self-attention in which each query attends to a dense local window plus a set of Fibonacci-spaced offsets, with a per-layer scalar alpha that compresses or expands the spacing. Across 21 language models trained under one matched recipe (60M parameters, 512 hidden, 16 layers, 426M tokens), we compare four ways of setting alpha across depth: fixed, per-layer learned, a static linear stagger, and a coprime (anti-gridding) reassignment of that stagger, together with a reach-matched power-of-2 control. Three results stand out. First, a static per-layer stagger improves perplexity over both fixed and learned alpha, and the gain is base-agnostic: applying the same stagger to a power-of-2 base lifts it above fixed Fibonacci and to parity with learned Fibonacci attention. Second, learning per layer is inert: it does not beat the static schedule and costs roughly five times the inference latency. Third, and most consequential, all sparse variants extrapolate to four times their training length with little or no degradation, whereas a recipe-matched dense baseline collapses (perplexity rises by 201% at 4x length); we attribute this to fixed-offset attention only ever querying relative positions seen during training. We also report two honest negatives: at training length the best sparse model has about 26% higher perplexity than the dense baseline, and the staggering gain is uniform across context positions rather than concentrated at long range.

Results and benchmarks

Freshness tier: hot
We study sparse self-attention in which each query attends to a dense local window plus a set of Fibonacci-spaced offsets, with a per-layer scalar alpha that compresses or expands the spacing.
Task Dataset Metric Value Source
Transformer MATH Perplexity 2 paper-derived

Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure below.

Implementation

No direct implementation yet

Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.

Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.

Implementation evidence summary
Confidence: low

Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.

Reproduction risks
  • Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow

Reproduction readiness

Time to first repro: days
Last checked: Aug 24, 2026

No repo

No verified implementation available

  • No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.

Hardware requirements

  • Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.

Framework baselines

Hugging Face artifacts

No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.

Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.

Research context

Tasks

Transformer

Methods

Transformer

Domains

Natural Language Processing

Evaluation and human feedback data

Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.

Open in HFEPX
Explore similar papers

Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.