Protoreasoning in Tiny Transformers

We show that tiny transformers can profitably employ a simple form of Chain of Thought, which we call protoreasoning, allowing us to study step-by-step reasoning on ~1M-parameter models and opening up opportunities for much more detailed experimentation and analysis than is feasible for larger models. Current Large Language Models exhibit impressive step-by-step reasoning, but we have yet to understand its generality, i.e., when and how LLMs learn genuinely general algorithms rather than "bags of heuristics." Such questions are hard to settle on compute-intensive frontier models trained on opaque data. To work at model scales far below the threshold for natural-language competence, we define reasoning-friendly tasks on Dyck languages (sentences of correctly nested brackets). We find that protoreasoning traces substantially close the out-of-distribution generalization gap, and ablations confirm that the trace's content, not merely its extra tokens, drives the gain.

Beyond Model Size: Probing the Gaps in Visual in-Context Learning by Training a Tiny Model

Visual in-Context Learning (VICL) aims at making progress towards adaptive vision models, that can -- based on a few examples -- adapt to a new task at test-time. With the history of in-context learning in natural language processing research, where large, parameter-heavy models are in use, one pathway that current VICL methods take is model- and data-scaling as key ingredients. Yet, it is not clear, whether these ingredients are the key for in-context learning to take shape in vision models. To stress-test such large models, we challenge them with an extreme counterexample: we train a tiny visual in-context model with merely $1$ million parameters and a modest amount of $70,000$ images. We compare the results of this severely capacity capped tiny model to $7,000\times$ larger VICL models in different adaptive settings, (1) on image data with small distribution shifts, (2) on unseen task encodings and (3) on a completely new task, i.e., the setting VICL envisions. With the chasm of training resources between the tiny- and large models, our experiments showcase a lack in how adaptive capabilities are measured, with respect to how tasks are encoded, which tasks were used in pre-training and the choice of metrics. These gaps in current VICL benchmarking underscore a need for innovation in evaluation of adaptive capabilities.