Half the Nonlinearity Is Wasted: Measuring and Reallocating the Transformer's MLP Budget

We show that MLP layers in transformer language models perform binary routing of continuous signals: the decision of whether a token needs nonlinear processing is well-captured by binary neuron activations, even though the signals being routed are continuous. In GPT-2 Small (124M parameters), we find that specific neurons implement a consensus architecture -- seven "default-ON" neurons and one exception handler (N2123 in Layer 11) that are 93-98% mutually exclusive -- creating a binary routing switch. A cross-layer analysis reveals a developmental arc: early layers (L1-3) use single gateway neurons to route exceptions without consensus quorums; middle layers (L4-6) show diffuse processing with neither gateway nor consensus; and late layers (L7-11) crystallize full consensus/exception architectures with increasing quorum size (1 to 3 to 7 consensus neurons). Causal validation confirms the routing is functional: removing the MLP at consensus breakdown costs 43.3% perplexity, while at full consensus removing it costs only 10.1% -- exceeding a 4x difference. Comparing binary vs. continuous features for the routing decision confirms that binarization loses essentially no information (79.2% vs. 78.8% accuracy), while continuous activations carry additional magnitude information (R^2 = 0.36 vs. 0.22). This binary routing structure explains why smooth polynomial approximation fails: cross-validated polynomial fits (degrees 2-7) never exceed R^2 = 0.06 for highly nonlinear layers. We propose that the well-established piecewise-affine characterization of deep networks can be complemented by a routing characterization: along the natural data manifold, the piecewise boundaries implement binary decisions about which tokens need nonlinear processing, routing continuous signals through qualitatively different computational paths.

Recent algebraic analysis shows that in decoder-only and encoder-only transformers, the Query projection $W_Q$ may be set to identity without noticeable performance deterioration. This is possible because attention depends on $X$ only through the products $XW_Q, XW_K, XW_V$, allowing basis transformations to be absorbed by adjacent layers and propagated through the network. We replace $W_Q \in \R^{d \times d}$ with a nonlinear residual of the form $Q(X) = X + f_θ(X)$, where $f_θ$ is a bottleneck MLP with $d^2 + O(d)$ parameters. The identity term anchors the nonlinearity to a known-good prior. Experiments on GPT-3 small style models show consistent improvement over the baseline ($2.40\%$ lower validation log-loss, $6.81\%$ lower perplexity), comfortably outperforming a model with 12.5% more non-embedding parameters. These results motivate investigation at larger scales and across modalities.

Transformer feed-forward networks (FFNs) are often treated as nonlinear stores of computation, yet how nonlinear a trained FFN block actually is has rarely been measured. We treat each FFN as a position-wise input-to-output map and split it into the exact least-squares linear approximation plus a residual. The held-out variance the closed-form linear map explains defines a block's linear recoverability (R^2_lin), an optimiser-free measure of its linearity. Across all twelve blocks of GPT-2, Pythia-160m, and llama-160m, R^2_lin is highly heterogeneous and non-monotone with depth, ranging from near-linear (>0.99) to strongly nonlinear (<0.3) between adjacent blocks, and is not set by the activation function: same-width GELU models GPT-2 and Pythia-160m have sharply different profiles, so recoverability is a learned property of individual trained blocks, not an architectural one. A low-rank bilinear probe of the residual recovers only a few points of R^2, with gain uncorrelated with residual nonlinearity: the unrecovered computation is not a single position-wise product but higher-order or distributed structure. The measurement also serves as a targeted compression signal: recoverable blocks admit large single-layer replacements (GPT-2's early FFN at 8x fewer parameters for +0.77 perplexity), while low-recoverability blocks flag where this is unsafe. It further exposes a methodological pitfall: trained linear baselines can badly under-converge on ill-conditioned transformer activations, so we report the exact closed-form least-squares ceiling throughout.