Good Papers

Attention Transfer Is Not Universally Effective for Vision Transformers

Attention transfer fails for four ViT families due to architectural mismatch, and adding the teacher's native components to students fully restores its effectiveness.

Huaiyuan Qin, Muli Yang, Gabriel James Goenawan, Peng Hu, Chen Gong, Xi Peng, Hongyuan Zhu

Published 2026Sydney Poster Session 6 · Thu, Dec 10, 5:00 PM–8:00 PM local time · Hall 1-4arXiv ↗OpenReview ↗

91%
OverallMust read
?
OverallMust readVote to see the scoreThe exact score shows once you've voted, so every vote is your own call. The first half of each home page shelf shows its scores.
Readers
–

Only vote on papers you've read. Sign in with GitHub to vote.

AI panel18/20reviewers recommend it
lenient 4/5
medium 10/10
strict 4/5
AI panel?Vote to see what the 20 AI reviewers said
Panel consensus
Attention transfer recovers teacher benefits only when student architectures match, with architectural mismatch causing severe failure; its precise routing-channel diagnosis demands careful family alignment but remains a sharp, practical warning against treating attention as universal knowledge.

Abstract

A recent work shows that Attention Transfer, which transfers only the attention patterns from a pre-trained teacher Vision Transformer (ViT) to a randomly initialized standard student ViT, is sufficient to recover the full benefit of the teacher's pre-trained weights. We revisit this finding on a comprehensive benchmark of 20 teachers from 11 well-known ViT families and reveal that Attention Transfer is not universally effective. While 7 families transfer successfully, 4 consistently fail, falling up to 5.1\% below the from-scratch no-transfer baseline. Further results demonstrate that this failure is family-consistent across model sizes, and persists under extended training durations, different transfer datasets, and out-of-distribution evaluations. Controlled analyses then consistently localize the problem to the attention-routing channel, indicating that the key issue is not whether the student can match the teacher's attention patterns, but whether the matched patterns remain functional for the student. Crucially, we identify architectural mismatch between the pre-trained teacher and the standard student as the primary mechanism. By adding only the teacher's native architectural components to the student in a randomly initialized state, we completely reverse the failure for all 4 families. Notably, these components alone do not improve from-scratch training, confirming that they specifically unlock the usability of the teacher's attention. We further systematically show that this failure is not explained by the inadequate choice of transfer loss or by differences in pre-training recipes. Our findings refine the prevailing understanding of attention in ViT representations: attention is sufficient \textit{only} when the student architecture matches the teacher.