| # Advanced Insights: Multi-Head Latent Attention Architecture | |
| ## Key Architectural Innovations | |
| ### Compression-Position Decoupling | |
| ```python | |
| # Two parallel pathways with different roles: | |
| [b, s, d] -> [b, s, d_c] -> [b, s, d] # Compression pathway | |
| [b, s, d] -> [b, s, d_r] -> RoPE() # Position pathway | |
| ``` | |
| Critical insight: Matrix multiplication non-commutativity necessitates pathway separation for efficient inference. | |
| ### Asymmetric Dimensionality | |
| ``` | |
| Q pathway: per-head rotary dimensions [b, s, n_h, d_r] | |
| K pathway: shared rotary dimensions [b, s, 1, d_r] | |
| ``` | |
| Design choice allows computational reuse while maintaining positional awareness. | |
| ### Cache Optimization Strategy | |
| Two distinct caches with different roles: | |
| ```python | |
| cache_kv: [b, max_len, d_c] # Compressed KV states | |
| cache_rk: [b, max_len, d_r] # Shared rotary key | |
| ``` | |
| Optimization insight: `d_c + d_r << d_model`, enabling significant memory reduction. | |
| ## Implementation Subtleties | |
| ### Matrix Absorption During Inference | |
| ``` | |
| Standard: W^Q @ (W^UK @ c^KV) # Three matrix multiplications | |
| Optimized: (W^Q @ W^UK) @ c^KV # Two matrix multiplications | |
| ``` | |
| Key requirement: Position-agnostic main pathway enables matrix pre-multiplication. | |
| ### Attention Pattern Evolution | |
| ``` | |
| t=1: Pattern[1:1] # Initial token | |
| t=2: Pattern[1:2] # One previous token | |
| t=n: Pattern[1:n] # Full context window | |
| ``` | |
| Cache growth introduces subtle position-dependent patterns requiring careful mask handling. | |
| ### Dimension Flow Control | |
| Critical transitions to monitor: | |
| ``` | |
| [b, s, d] -> [b, s, d_c] # Down projection | |
| [b, s, d_c] -> [b, s+cache, d_c] # Cache concatenation | |
| [b, s+cache, d_c] -> [b, s+cache, d] # Up projection | |
| ``` | |
| Each transition must preserve both positional and content information. | |
| ## Edge Cases and Considerations | |
| ### Cross-Attention Scenarios | |
| ```python | |
| q_len != kv_len # Length mismatch | |
| d_c < d_model # Compression bottleneck | |
| ``` | |
| Compression and position information must be maintained across different sequence lengths. | |
| ### Position-Aware Cache Updates | |
| ```python | |
| # Position-dependent attention mask creation | |
| mask[:, :, i, :(start_pos + i + 1)] = 0 # Can attend | |
| mask[:, :, i, (start_pos + i + 1):] = -inf # Cannot attend | |
| ``` | |
| Mask must evolve with cache to maintain causal attention patterns. | |
| ### Numerical Stability | |
| 1. Scaling factor accounts for both pathways: `1/sqrt(d_head + d_rotate)` | |
| 2. Compression dimensions balance between efficiency and representation capacity | |
| 3. RoPE dimensions impact position encoding granularity | |
| ## Performance Implications | |
| ### Memory Complexity | |
| ``` | |
| Standard: O(b * s * d_model) | |
| MLA: O(b * s * (d_c + d_r)) | |
| ``` | |
| Where `d_c + d_r << d_model` | |
| ### Computational Trade-offs | |
| 1. Additional projections for position pathway | |
| 2. Reduced cache size enables longer sequences | |
| 3. Matrix absorption reduces inference compute | |
| ## Integration Considerations | |
| ### Initialization Strategy | |
| ```python | |
| # Critical hyperparameters | |
| d_c: Compression dimension | |
| d_rotate: Position encoding dimension | |
| ``` | |
| Trade-off between compression efficiency and position encoding capacity. | |
| ### Cache Management | |
| ```python | |
| # Two update patterns | |
| cache_kv[:, pos:pos+s] = current_kv # Content cache | |
| cache_rk[:, pos:pos+s] = current_rk # Position cache | |
| ``` | |
| Synchronization between caches crucial for correctness. |