English

Were RNNs All We Needed?

Machine Learning 2024-12-02 v3 Artificial Intelligence

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.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.2410.01201,
  title  = {Were RNNs All We Needed?},
  author = {Leo Feng and Frederick Tung and Mohamed Osama Ahmed and Yoshua Bengio and Hossein Hajimirsadeghi},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.01201},
  year   = {2024}
}
R2 v1 2026-06-28T19:04:38.389Z