Skip to results
MLSift

Titles, abstracts, or an arXiv ID

← Back to results
NLP & Language ModelsHybrid Language Model2609.04434

What Attention Recalls and Recurrence Controls in Hybrid Language Models

Kirill Afendulev, Alexey Dontsov, Elena Tutubalina, Anton Korznikov

cs.CL

Abstract

Hybrid language models combine attention with a fixed-size recurrent state, but the role of each channel remains unclear. We introduce two cache-level interventions. Split-prefill keeps only the KV cache or only the recurrent state from a prefilled context, then generates an answer. State-swap pairs the KV cache from one context with the recurrent state from another in a single forward pass. On Qwen3.5 and Falcon-H1, the two channels split sharply by function. Exact retrieval survives only through attention (64-98% of full accuracy) and collapses to zero through recurrence. Output language and persona reverse the pattern: both survive recurrence (70-80% and 3-5x) while KV-only drops to ~1% language accuracy. State-swap confirms this causally: the answer takes its value from the KV side and its language from the recurrent side. Recurrent-only generation also accepts words that were never in the context but share meaning or parts with seen items. Attention provides a lookup over what was said; the recurrent state shapes how the model says it next.

Topics

Classified with taxonomy v2 on Mon, 7 Sept 2026.

Report a classification error

Loading the PDF downloads the document. Open it in your browser's viewer, or load it here.

Open PDF