Were RNNs All We Needed?
Keywords: Recurrent Neural Networks, RNNs, Sequence Modelling, Efficiency, LSTMs, GRUs, Parallel Scan
TL;DR: Revisiting decade-old RNNs (LSTMs and GRUs), we introduce minimal versions (minLSTMs and minGRUs) that (1) use fewer parameters, (2) are parallelizable during training, and (3) match the performance of recent sequence models.
Abstract: The introduction of Transformers in 2017 reshaped the landscape of deep learning. Originally proposed for sequence modelling, Transformers have since achieved widespread success across various domains. However, the scalability limitations of Transformers—particularly with respect to sequence length—have sparked renewed interest in novel recurrent models that are parallelizable during training, offer comparable performance, and scale more effectively.
In this work, we revisit sequence modelling from a historical perspective, focusing on Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs), which dominated the field for two decades before the rise of Transformers. Specifically, we examine LSTMs (1997) and GRUs (2014). We demonstrate that by simplifying these models, we can derive minimal versions (minLSTMs and minGRUs) that (1) use fewer parameters than their traditional counterparts, (2) are fully parallelizable during training, and (3) achieve surprisingly competitive performance on a range of tasks, rivalling recent models including Transformers.
Primary Area: foundation or frontier models, including LLMs
Code Of Ethics: I acknowledge that I and all co-authors of this work have read and commit to adhering to the ICLR Code of Ethics.
Submission Guidelines: I certify that this submission complies with the submission instructions as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/AuthorGuide.
Anonymous Url: I certify that there is no URL (e.g., github page) that could be used to find authors’ identity.
No Acknowledgement Section: I certify that there is no acknowledgement section in this submission for double blind review.
Submission Number: 8241
Loading