Attention Sinks and Compression Valleys in LLMs are Two Sides of the Same Coin
Enrique Queipo-de-Llano, Alvaro Arroyo, Federico Barbero, Xiaowen Dong, Michael M. Bronstein, Yann LeCun, Ravid Shwartz-Ziv
Abstract
Attention sinks and compression valleys have attracted significant attention as two puzzling phenomena in large language models, but have been studied in isolation. In this work, we present a surprising connection between attention sinks and compression valleys, tracing both to the formation of massive activations in the residual stream. We prove theoretically that massive activations necessarily produce representational compression and establish bounds on the resulting entropy reduction. Through experiments across several models (410M-120B parameters), we confirm that when the beginning-of-sequence token develops extreme activation norms in the middle layers, both compression valleys and attention sinks emerge simultaneously. Targeted ablation studies validate our theoretical predictions. This unified view motivates us to propose the Mix-Compress-Refine theory of information flow, as an attempt to explain how LLMs organize their computation in depth by controlling attention and representational compression via massive activations. Specifically, we posit that Transformer-based LLMs process tokens in three distinct phases: (1) broad mixing in the early layers, (2) compressed computation with limited mixing in the middle layers, and (3) selective refinement in the late layers. Our framework helps explain why embedding tasks perform best at intermediate layers, whereas generation tasks benefit from full-depth processing, clarifying differences in task-dependent representations.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 7766f3b3-0ec3-47ee-b889-4568f9be5689Cited by top-tier papers11
- Surgery: Mitigating Harmful Fine-Tuning for Large Language Models via Attention SinkGuozhi Liu, Weiwei Lin, Tiansheng Huang, Ruichao Mo et al.ICML 2026 · 5 citations
- NerVE: Nonlinear Eigenspectrum Dynamics in LLM Feed-Forward NetworksNandan Kumar Jha, Brandon ReagenICLR 2026 · 4 citations
- Attention Sink Forges Native MoE in Attention Layers: Sink-Aware Training to Address Head CollapseZizhuo Fu, Wenxuan Zeng, Runsheng Wang, Meng LiICML 2026 · 3 citations
- LLM-based Embeddings: Attention Values Encode Sentence Semantics Better Than Hidden StatesYeqin Zhang, Yunfei Wang, Jiaxuan Chen, Ke Qin et al.ICML 2026 · 1 citation
- Uncovering the Latent Potential of Deep Intermediate RepresentationsArnesh Batra, Arush Gumber, Aniket Khandelwal, Jashn Khemani et al.ICML 2026 · 1 citation
Builds on16
- WinoGrande: An Adversarial Winograd Schema Challenge at ScaleKeisuke Sakaguchi, Ronan Le Bras, Chandra Bhagavatula, Yejin ChoiAAAI 2020 · 3,037 citations
- Efficient Streaming Language Models with Attention SinksGuangxuan Xiao, Yuandong Tian, Beidi Chen, Song Han et al.ICLR 2024 · 1,714 citations
- Attention is not all you need: pure attention loses rank doubly exponentially with depthYihe Dong, Jean-Baptiste Cordonnier, Andreas LoukasICML 2021 · 522 citations
- The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language ModelsKiho Park, Yo Joong Choe, Victor VeitchICML 2024 · 461 citations
- Confident Adaptive Language ModelingTal Schuster, Adam Fisch, Jai Gupta, Mostafa Dehghani et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 394 citations
Related papers
- Towards Understanding Massive Activations in Attention Sink MechanismHaiyu Wang, Yuanyuan LinICML 2026
- Anatomy of Massive Activations and Attention SinksShangwen Sun, Alfredo Canziani, Yann LeCun, Jiachen ZhuICML 2026
- A Single Layer to Explain Them All: Understanding Massive Values in Large Language ModelsZeru Shi, Zhenting Wang, Fan Yang, Qifan Wang et al.ICML 2026
- Attention Sinks: A 'Catch, Tag, Release' Mechanism for EmbeddingsStephen Zhang, Mustafa Khan, Vardan PapyanNeurIPS 2025 · 18 citations
- The Structural Origin of Attention Sink: Variance Discrepancy, Super Neurons, and Dimension DisparitySiquan Li, Kaiqi Jiang, Jiacheng Sun, Tianyang HuICML 2026 · 1 citation
