Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Computational evaluation demonstrates improved test perplexity in frozen language models via surprise-gated amplitude memory, suggesting efficient online adaptation without backpropagation.
We augment frozen language models with a fixed-size Hebbian associative memory that adapts at inference time with no gradients, no backpropagation, and no growth in storage. The memory is a single matrix (4.2 MB). Keys are sliding n-gram bindings of random token hypervectors, whose retrieval kernel is near-orthogonal except under exact repetition; values are token hypervectors whose stored coefficients are maintained as amplitudes -- square roots of accumulated mass -- by a local read-modify-write rule inspired by the classical square-root (Bhattacharyya) embedding of probability distributions; and every write is gated by the model's own token surprise -ln p_ LM , a three-factor plasticity rule whose modulator is free at inference. We call the system . On a 36k-token stream of novel technical text, the memory improves GPT-2's test negative log-likelihood by +0.486 +/- 0.005 nats (perplexity 31.2 -> 19.2; mean +/- SEM over 5 hypervector seeds), outperforming an unbounded kNN-LM (+0.281; paired block-bootstrap P=1.000) with 13x less memory , an exact n-gram cache (+0.318), a byte-matched kNN-LM (+0.174), and retrieval-augmented rescoring (+0.043). On a second, modern model (Qwen3-0.6B) the mechanism orderings replicate and statistically matches unbounded kNN-LM at one-sixteenth the memory; on a downstream content-token recall task, the augmented models complete recurring technical terms at up to 2.1x the frozen model's accuracy after a single reading pass. Ablations attribute the gain: amplitude encoding contributes +0.28 nats over count encoding (the largest single factor; P=1.000 in every seed), surprise gating quadruples the gain of uniform writes, and a multi-scale key doubles gains on low-repetition text. At 500k tokens the fixed matrix saturates (0.5 writes per parameter); leaky decay recovers 2.3x of the gain and a 4x larger matrix recovers 3.4x, quantifying a capacity-sizing law, while unbounded kNN-LM (grown to 770 MB) dominates on long narrative -- an honestly mapped regime boundary. Two evaluation artifacts (a corpus-formatting pathology producing +1.35 nats of phantom gains, caught by a shuffled-retrieval control; an off-by-one in the RAG baseline) are documented so others avoid them. Code and data scripts are released.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
abderrahmane sghairi (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: