What Accuracy Hides In Learned Transformer Programs

We demonstrate that a small transformer can learn to execute programs in MicroPy, a simplified yet computationally universal programming language. Given procedure definitions together with an expression to evaluate, the transformer predicts small-step execution using PENCIL scaffolding for space-efficient execution within a bounded context window. After training on randomly generated, meaningless MicroPy programs, the learned transformer generalizes to various human-written programs including bit copying and flipping, binary addition and multiplication, and SAT verification and solving. We note that the trained model can achieve out-of-distribution generalization; i.e., evaluate novel programs from distribution on programs. Since MicroPy can express any computation, our results provide empirical evidence that a standard transformer can be trained to act as a universal computer.

Determining whether a program terminates is a core challenge in program analysis with direct implications for correctness, verification, and security. We investigate whether transformer architectures can recognise termination patterns directly from source code and how their strengths can be amplified through ensembles. To overcome the extreme scarcity of non-terminating examples, we design an ensemble framework of compact transformer encoders, systematically trained with a suite of imbalance-aware loss functions and class-aware sampling techniques. By combining models trained with distinct loss functions, our ensembles achieve substantially stronger performance than any single transformer, outperforming both powerful off-the-shelf LLMs and graph-based methods. Finally, we introduce an attribution pipeline that produces syntax-aware explanations for the termination estimation.

Reasoning models generate long chains of thought before they answer, yet it is debated whether the content of these chains does real computational work or is largely decorative. We study this question by viewing a transformer as a shallow circuit. One forward pass through a fixed number of layers has constant depth, so any procedure that runs the model a constant number of times is a shallow circuit. We call the best accuracy that a shallow circuit can reach on a task the ceiling of the task, and a task is serial if its ceiling lies below one. We prove three results on serial tasks that hold for every transformer, no matter how it was trained. Necessity: replacing the chain by anything that does not depend on its content, such as filler tokens or a restatement of the question, drives the accuracy down to the ceiling, and on a maximally serial task down to chance. Depth: no shallow computation can write the chain of a model whose accuracy exceeds the ceiling, not even approximately. Locality: the answer is one shallow pass away from the finished chain, so all of the serial reasoning happens in the chain. On word problems of finite groups, whose ceilings are known, small transformers trained from scratch, with or without reinforcement learning, attain the predicted numbers: chain-trained models solve every input length and fall to chance when the chain is erased, chainless models collapse to the ceiling as the input length grows, and open-weight reasoning models given the same problem in words return to the baseline without their chain. On MATH-500 and AIME, erasing the chain costs open reasoning models 0.52 to 0.82 accuracy, a sentence shuffle is harmless, and a token shuffle is as harmful as erasing; the same holds for checkpoints trained by GRPO with a correct or a random reward. The ceiling of a task therefore answers when a transformer can succeed without its chain of thought.