Quiz with answers — Kimi Delta Attention: a bounded case study
Answer all eight questions, then check the score. Open only the explanations needed for remediation.
1. Solve the worked-case variant: Increase the second gate channel from [0.9,0.2] to [0.9,0.24]. Compare the trace retained in that channel after one step with all other values fixed.
Show answer
A. For an initial trace of 1, the second channel retains 0.24 instead of 0.20, which is 20% more. The first channel stays at 0.9, so the vector gate changes memory channel by channel. The correct answer executes the requested change and gives a checkable result; the other texts do not close this calculation or trace.
2. Which causal order correctly connects the first three stages of “Kimi Delta Attention: a bounded case study”?
Show answer
B. Established mechanism → Per-channel decay → Delta correction The chain follows the taught progression; reversing stages consumes a representation or state before it is produced.
3. If “Delta correction” is removed, which diagnostic method is defensible?
Show answer
C. Keep the same input, predict the first output that depends on “Delta correction,” then compare the before/after trace. One intervention and a prior prediction make the delta attributable to the removed mechanism.
4. Which verdict respects this session’s validity boundary?
Show answer
D. Exact Kimi K3 specifications are not claimed as verified in this lesson; the vendor technical report (Kimi Linear, arXiv:2510.26692, to verify) is cited without independent replication. The correct answer bounds the conclusion; the others turn a local relation into a global guarantee.
5. Which evidence best matches the stated status of “Kimi Delta Attention: a bounded case study”?
Show answer
A. Mixed: established mechanisms + source-reported Kimi K3-style choices. Product or mechanism evidence must remain attributed and measured; availability and completion do not prove value.
6. When should a simpler baseline be preferred to “Source-reported”?
Show answer
B. When a controlled test shows equivalent quality with lower memory, latency, or complexity. The choice depends on a measured trade-off on the real workload, not novelty or one isolated metric.
7. A learner gets the right result but cannot explain “Per-channel decay.” Which remediation is most useful?
Show answer
C. Rebuild the first missing transformation, label its inputs and outputs, then test a neighboring case. The remediation targets the first causal break and then requires transfer instead of rewarding a guessed result.
8. Which submission actually demonstrates the outcome “Classify claims by evidence strength.”?
Show answer
D. A trace with starting data, transformations, observed result, boundary, and next experiment. The correct submission makes the reasoning reproducible and the verdict revisable by future measurement.