Empirical audit uncovers significant failures in frozen-key model, suggesting complex memory dynamics.
We report the first real-model empirical audit of the GPTMem framework on GPT-2 Small (124M parameters). Three principal findings emerge. First, the frozen-key regime condition (Test 0) fails categorically: the admissibility ratio εFK exceeds the threshold by four to five orders of magnitude in all tested layers, rendering the frozen-attention linearisation inapplicable to this model. Second, the holding function h(Δ) = ‖L^S_Δ‖op exhibits clean offset-algebraic decay, h(Δ) = c + AΔ^−β, with an observed residual holding floor c > 0 in all four target layers (R² > 0.98), confirming non-Markovian memory structure while falsifying the pure-algebraic prediction β ≈ 1.5–3. Third, causal intervention reveals that the four “Traitor Heads” identified in the Paris Lobotomy are not a homogeneous class: only L10H10 has positive tail and floor effects; the other three heads have negative effects upon ablation. L10H10 alone accounts for ≈64% of the full four-head tail effect and ≈70% of the floor effect in Layer 10, with z > 20 against random single-head controls and strong superadditive synergy with L10H0. Layer 11 operates as downstream rebalancing, not as a tail origin. The categorical core of GPTMem (the category, structural lemmas, Three Laws) remains untouched; what these data falsify is the frozen-key empirical bridge, not the theoretical programme. The intervention-first route through tail/floor metrics and matched controls emerges as the viable empirical access path.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jonas Jakob Gebendorfer (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: