Sparse Growing Transformer: Training-Time Sparse Depth Allocation via Progressive Attention Looping

Yao Chen, Yilong Chen, Yinqi Yang, Junyuan Shang, Zhenyu Zhang, Zefeng Zhang, Shuaiyi Nie, Shuohuan Wang, Yu Sun, Hua Wu, HaiFeng Wang, Tingwen Liu · Mar 25, 2026 · Citations: 0

Long Horizon

Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Existing approaches to increasing the effective depth of Transformers predominantly rely on parameter reuse, extending computation through recursive execution. Under this paradigm, the network structure remains static along the training timeline, and additional computational depth is uniformly assigned to entire blocks at the parameter level. This rigidity across training time and parameter space leads to substantial computational redundancy during training. In contrast, we argue that depth allocation during training should not be a static preset, but rather a progressively growing structural process. Our systematic analysis reveals a deep-to-shallow maturation trajectory across layers, where high-entropy attention heads play a crucial role in semantic integration. Motivated by this observation, we introduce the Sparse Growing Transformer (SGT). SGT is a training-time sparse depth allocation framework that progressively extends recurrence from deeper to shallower layers via targeted attention looping on informative heads. This mechanism induces structural sparsity by selectively increasing depth only for a small subset of parameters as training evolves. Extensive experiments across multiple parameter scales demonstrate that SGT consistently outperforms training-time static block-level looping baselines under comparable settings, while reducing the additional training FLOPs overhead from approximately 16--20% to only 1--3% relative to a standard Transformer backbone.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.
The abstract does not clearly name benchmarks or metrics.

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Detected

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 15%

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here:

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub Tool-Use Eval Hub

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.