Semi-Local Attention (SLA) is a hybrid attention mechanism integrating fixed sliding-window and residual linear streams to capture both local and global contexts.
It efficiently scales with sequence length by reducing computational and memory costs compared to full-attention models.
Kernel optimizations enable SLA to run effectively on modern accelerators, making it practical for large-scale transformer architectures.
Semi-Local Attention (SLA) is a hybrid attention mechanism that integrates a fixed-size sliding-window (local) attention with a residual linear-attention stream designed to capture contextual information from tokens outside the window. Introduced in the context of the RATTENTION model, SLA addresses intrinsic limitations of local-global attention architectures by enabling efficient context aggregation that scales favorably with sequence length, while maintaining or exceeding the accuracy of full-attention models at drastically reduced computational and memory costs (Wang et al., 18 Jun 2025).
Given Q,K,V∈Rn×d (queries, keys, and values), for each position i∈[1,n], compute attention coefficients αi,j for the window j∈[max(1,i−w+1),i]: αi,j=∑k=max(1,i−w+1)iexp(QiKk⊤/d)exp(QiKj⊤/d)
The local attention output: yiswa=j=max(1,i−w+1)∑iαi,jVj
1.2 Residual Linear Attention
A feature map ϕ:Rd→Rd′ satisfying ⟨ϕ(x),ϕ(x′)⟩≈exp(x⊤x′/d) is employed. In practice, ϕ(x)=exp(x) (elementwise), with RMSNorm. The recurrent state St∈Rd′×d is updated sequentially: i∈[1,n]0
At position i∈[1,n]1, the RLA stream reads from i∈[1,n]2: i∈[1,n]3
For i∈[1,n]4, i∈[1,n]5.
1.3 Fusion
Both streams are fused: i∈[1,n]6
i∈[1,n]7 is projected via i∈[1,n]8 before the standard Transformer residual and feed-forward blocks.
2. Layerwise Algorithmic Workflow
A single Transformer layer with SLA operates as follows:
Linear Projection:i∈[1,n]9, αi,j0, αi,j1 for layer input αi,j2.
Iteration (across αi,j3):
Compute sliding-window attention over αi,j4.
Update αi,j5.
Read residual stream αi,j6 (αi,j7 if αi,j8).
Fuse: αi,j9 as above.
Output:j∈[max(1,i−w+1),i]0.
Feed-forward:j∈[max(1,i−w+1),i]1.
Architecturally, RATTENTION interleaves three SLA layers with one full-attention layer.
3. Computational Complexity Analysis
The table below summarizes comparative asymptotic costs, where j∈[max(1,i−w+1),i]2 sequence length, j∈[max(1,i−w+1),i]3 hidden size, j∈[max(1,i−w+1),i]4 window size, j∈[max(1,i−w+1),i]5:
The local part matches SWA cost; the linear part adds αi,j=∑k=max(1,i−w+1)iexp(QiKk⊤/d)exp(QiKj⊤/d)2 extra time and αi,j=∑k=max(1,i−w+1)iexp(QiKk⊤/d)exp(QiKj⊤/d)3 memory.
SLA provides a strict efficiency gain when αi,j=∑k=max(1,i−w+1)iexp(QiKk⊤/d)exp(QiKj⊤/d)4 and αi,j=∑k=max(1,i−w+1)iexp(QiKk⊤/d)exp(QiKj⊤/d)5; αi,j=∑k=max(1,i−w+1)iexp(QiKk⊤/d)exp(QiKj⊤/d)6 is a constant-size recurrent state.
SLA sits between local and global attention, offering a trade-off unattainable by either independently.
4. Kernel and Implementation Considerations
RATTENTION employs two kernel optimizations to ensure SLA’s practicality on accelerators (e.g., TPU, GPU):