GRU
Gated recurrent units are gated RNNs with fewer gates than LSTMs. They use update and reset gates to control hidden-state memory.
The update is:
The update gate controls how much new candidate state replaces old memory.
Key Ideas
- GRUs are simpler than LSTMs because they merge cell and hidden state.
- They are often faster and smaller than LSTMs while retaining useful gating.
- They still process sequences recurrently, so long-range interaction is mediated through a hidden-state bottleneck.
- They are useful as baselines for streaming or compact sequence models.
Gate Interpretation
| Gate | Role |
|---|---|
| update gate | interpolates old state and new candidate state |
| reset gate | controls how much previous state contributes to candidate state |
| candidate | proposed replacement memory |
The final interpolation:
acts like a learned residual update over time.
GRU vs LSTM
| Aspect | GRU | LSTM |
|---|---|---|
| memory state | hidden state only | hidden plus cell state |
| gates | update and reset | input, forget, output |
| parameters | usually fewer | usually more |
| baseline role | compact recurrent baseline | stronger gated recurrent baseline |
The choice is rarely the main scientific claim; what matters is whether recurrent baselines are tuned fairly.
Evaluation Boundary
| Claim | Check |
|---|---|
| efficient sequence model | parameter count, latency, sequence length |
| long-range modeling | truncation and hidden-state bottleneck |
| streaming model | state reset/carry policy |
| protein representation | homolog split and representation pooling |
Practical Checks
- Check whether the task needs bidirectional context.
- Track how padding masks interact with hidden-state updates.
- Verify whether the final representation is last state, pooled states, or token-level outputs.
- Compare with state-space models when long sequences are central.
- Are GRU and LSTM baselines matched in hidden size, parameters, and tuning budget?
- Does padding update the hidden state accidentally?