Transformer-based language models are widely deployed for reasoning, yet their behavior under inference-time stochasticity remains underexplored. While dropout is common during training, its inference-time effects via Monte Carlo sampling lack systematic evaluation across architectures, limiting understanding of model reliability in uncertainty-aware applications. This work analyzes dropout-induced variability across 19 transformer models using MC Dropout with 100 stochastic forward passes per sample. Dropout robustness is defined as maintaining high accuracy and stable predictions under stochastic inference, measured by standard deviation of per-run accuracies. A cognitive decomposition framework disentangles performance into memory and reasoning components. Experiments span five dropout configurations yielding 95 unique evaluations on 1,000 samples. Results reveal substantial architectural variation. Smaller models demonstrate perfect prediction stability while medium-sized models exhibit notable volatility. Mid-sized models achieve the best overall performance; larger models excel at memory tasks. Critically, 53% of models suffer severe accuracy degradation under baseline MC Dropout, with task-specialized models losing up to 24 percentage points, indicating unsuitability for uncertainty quantification in these architectures. Asymmetric effects emerge: high dropout reduces memory accuracy by 27 percentage points while reasoning degrades only 1 point, suggesting memory tasks rely on stable representations that dropout disrupts. 84% of models demonstrate memory-biased performance. This provides the first comprehensive MC Dropout benchmark for transformers, revealing dropout robustness is architecture-dependent and uncorrelated with scale. The cognitive profiling framework offers actionable guidance for model selection in uncertainty-aware applications.
Figures & tables
Dataset
Cognitive Domain
Source
Sample Size (Total/Train/Test)
Max Input Length
SQuAD v1.1
Memory (Factual Recall)
Wikipedia Passages
500 (400/100)
200 chars
HellaSwag
Reasoning (Commonsense)
Event Scenarios
500 (400/100)
Full context
Table 1: Dataset Sources and Sampling Strategy
Architecture Family
Type
HuggingFace Checkpoint
BERT
Encoder
bert-base-uncased
Encoder
bert-large-uncased
Encoder
prajjwal1/bert-tiny
RoBERTa
Encoder
roberta-base
Encoder
distilroberta-base
Encoder
deepset/roberta-base-squad2
Table 2: Evaluated Transformer Models
Configuration
Attention Rate
FFN Rate
Description
Deterministic
0.0
0.0
Standard inference mode (dropout disabled)
Baseline
0.1
0.1
Typical training-time dropout rates
High Attention
0.6
0.1
High stochasticity in attention mechanisms
High FFN
0.1
0.6
High stochasticity in feed-forward networks
High Both
0.6
0.6
Elevated stochasticity in all components
Table 3: Dropout Configurations
Model
Overall
Memory
Reasoning
Overall
Memory
Reasoning
Accuracy
Accuracy
Accuracy
Std Dev
Std Dev
Std Dev
deberta-v3-small
0.796
0.922
0.669
0.0161
0.0139
0.0527
gpt2-medium
0.722
0.922
0.523
0.0146
0.0139
0.0464
scibert
0.703
0.870
0.535
0.0138
0.0172
0.0446
spanbert
0.701
0.915
0.486
0.0143
0.0139
0.0464
deberta-v3-base
0.700
0.938
0.462
0.0156
0.0139
0.0526
Table 4: Top 5 Performing Models (Baseline Configuration)
Model
Deterministic
Baseline (MC)
Degradation
Mean
Std
Mean
Std
roberta-base-squad2
0.735
0.0000
0.497
0.0314
−0.238
albert-base-v2
0.640
0.0129
0.489
0.0339
−0.151
deberta-v3-base
0.800
0.0000
0.700
0.0156
−0.100
electra-base-discriminator
0.735
0.0000
0.673
0.0191
−0.062
spanbert-base-cased
0.745
0.0000
0.701
0.0143
−0.044
Table 5: Models Where Deterministic Inference Outperforms MC Dropout
Figure 1: Overall Accuracy Comparison (Top 5 Degradation). Performance comparison between Deterministic inference (blue) and Baseline MC Dropout (orange, 0.1 rate) across the five models exhibiting the largest overall degradation. Error bars represent the standard deviation across 100 stochastic forward passes.
Figure 2: Reasoning Task Performance. Reasoning accuracy remains relatively stable between deterministic and stochastic modes, with overlapping error bars indicating minimal impact of dropout on inferential capabilities.
Figure 3: Memory Task Performance. Memory accuracy exhibits severe degradation under MC Dropout, particularly for task-specialized models like roberta-base-squad2.
Configuration
Memory Acc.
Reasoning Acc.
Gap
Deterministic (0.0/0.0)
0.804
0.508
+0.296
Baseline (0.1/0.1)
0.792
0.492
+0.301
High Attention (0.6/0.1)
0.588
0.479
+0.110
High FFN (0.1/0.6)
0.538
0.494
+0.044
High Both (0.6/0.6)
0.533
0.497
+0.036
Table 6: Dropout Configuration Effects on Cognitive Capabilities