PreprintCited by 0Topic ModelingNeural Networks and ApplicationsNatural Language Processing Techniques

Memory by Design: Bayesian Layers for Sequence Modeling

Open access
Dowling, Matthew, Jeon, Hyungju, Savin, Cristina, Park, Il Memming·2026·arXiv

Abstract

We introduce the \emph{design-model framework}: a way to derive efficient recurrent sequence maps from explicit assumptions about memory. A design model writes evidence into memory by exact Bayesian filtering; a query- dependent readout produces a predictive distribution whose mean is the layer output. In our linear-Gaussian instantiation, the \emph{Bayesian Layer} propagates both a mean and a covariance: the covariance tracks uncertainty over stored associations, steering writes toward uncertain directions, attenuating gains as evidence accumulates, and preserving confident memories. The same framework unifies several sub-quadratic recurrences: linear attention, GLA, and Mamba-2/SSD are exact filters under a latent-input design model, whereas DeltaNet and related Delta-rule models are covariance-reset reductions of the Bayesian Layer's design model. Restoring covariance propagation yields closed-form predictions for retrieval dynamics, which we verify empirically, and improves robustness beyond the training regime in controlled collision studies, learned associative recall, and the Zoology MQAR benchmark. Training from scratch on WikiText-103 under matched state budgets lowers perplexity on associative-recall hits. Distilling Bayesian Layers into a pretrained 340M Gated DeltaNet improves RULER long-context retrieval over a matched-compute control, at a 2.5--2.7\% held-out perplexity cost.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2605.31163

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Dowling, M., Jeon, H., Savin, C., & Park, I. M.
Affiliations
  • Champalimaud Foundation (PT)
  • New York University (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7163000582
Cited by
0
References
4
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (UIDB/04443/2020)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (RF1DA056404)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
design model, Bayesian filtering, memory models, linear Gaussian models, covariance propagation, uncertainty estimation, linear attention, GLA, Mamba-2, associative recall, retrieval dynamics, knowledge distillation, long-context retrieval

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review