Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Source content · Analysis pending3 min read

Stiefel Attention: When the Geometry of Transformer Projection Matrices Dominates Optimizer Choice---and When It Does Not

Summary

arXiv:2609.19363v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The query and key projections $\WQ,\WK$ in attention are almost always trained by Euclidean optimizers with no constraint on their geometry. We constrain them to the Stiefel manifold and optimize them there with a Riemannian Adam that carries one scalar second moment per frame, caps its step by a trust region, and retracts polarly. Four propositions prove this update is steepest descent in the embedded metric, independent of gradient scale, well conditioned, and exactly $\mathrm{O}(d)$-equivariant, each certified numerically in \texttt{float64}. A fifth supplies the mechanism: weight decay has \emph{identically zero} Riemannian gradient on $\St(d,r)$, since $W = W I_r$ lies in the normal space, so the learned attention geometry survives the…

SourcearXiv Machine LearningAuthor: Rub\'en Dar\'io Guerrero
Stiefel Attention: When the Geometry of Transformer Projection Matrices Dominates Optimizer Choice---and When It Does Not
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 16 Sep 2026]

Title:Stiefel Attention: When the Geometry of Transformer Projection Matrices Dominates Optimizer Choice---and When It Does Not

View a PDF of the paper titled Stiefel Attention: When the Geometry of Transformer Projection Matrices Dominates Optimizer Choice---and When It Does Not, by Rub\'en Dar\'io Guerrero

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:The query and key projections $\WQ,\WK$ in attention are almost always trained by Euclidean optimizers with no constraint on their geometry. We constrain them to the Stiefel manifold and optimize them there with a Riemannian Adam that carries one scalar second moment per frame, caps its step by a trust region, and retracts polarly. Four propositions prove this update is steepest descent in the embedded metric, independent of gradient scale, well conditioned, and exactly $\mathrm{O}(d)$-equivariant, each certified numerically in \texttt{float64}. A fifth supplies the mechanism: weight decay has \emph{identically zero} Riemannian gradient on $\St(d,r)$, since $W = W I_r$ lies in the normal space, so the learned attention geometry survives the collapse cycles that decay drives through the rest of the model. On modular arithmetic grokking, a single run holds $97.0\%$ validation accuracy at epoch 20\,000 against the baseline's $61.1\%$---an unstable endpoint we report as evidence for the mechanism rather than as an effect size. On CIFAR-10 patches the same rule gains $\mathbf{+8.98}$\,pp over 12 paired starts ($t{=}60.6$, $12/12$), and the gap widens with data rather than eroding. The step rule earns this: a fixed-step Riemannian update is degree one in the gradient, so it moves $24$--$40\times$ less per step than an identically shaped AdamW matrix---its frames barely leave their initialization, and freezing them outright costs only $0.28$\,pp. An ablation credits the whole gain to making the step scale free, and nothing measurable to the projector or to equivariance. A negative result sharpens the account: gauge removal cannot motivate the method, because a direction along which the loss is invariant carries no gradient at all.

Comments: 16 pages, 2 figures

Subjects:

Machine Learning (cs.LG); Numerical Analysis (math.NA)

MSC classes: 68T07, 65K10, 53C20, 90C26, 22C05

Cite as: arXiv:2609.19363 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2609.19363v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.19363

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Rubén Darío Guerrero Mr. [view email] [v1] Wed, 16 Sep 2026 19:35:47 UTC (147 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Stiefel Attention: When the Geometry of Transformer Projection Matrices Dominates Optimizer Choice---and When It Does Not, by Rub\'en Dar\'io Guerrero

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.LG

new | recent | 2026-09

Change to browse by:

cs cs.NA math math.NA

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

IArxiv recommender toggle

IArxiv Recommender (What is IArxiv?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • AI generation is temporarily unavailable; this entry was preserved with deterministic fallback metadata.
  • arXiv:2609.19363v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The query and key projections $\WQ,\WK$ in attention are almost always trained by Euclidean optimizers with no constraint on their…

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.