AI Risk Wire

Cases › got worse over time › LR-2026-0833

UMT5 decoder causal-mask regression allowed attending to future tokens in Transformers

Confirmed Why: Hugging Face's own report · Hugging Face · 1 independent report

Status: no action reported

Severity minor
Reported 3 Nov 2026
Developer and model UMT5
Agent tool Transformers

No source states: loss or records, could do, deployer, industry.

Severity minor: The regression was contained to the library's main branch with no crash and no third party affected.

Transformers enabled PyTorch's scaled dot-product attention (SDPA) for T5, and as a side effect UMT5's decoder could attend to future tokens, so during training it could peek at the answer it was supposed to predict. Nothing crashed, and the bug stayed in main for almost two months. It was surfaced when the team replayed frozen Model Integration Contracts over five months of Transformers commits: a small UMT5 fixture running on CPU flagged the regression on every affected commit, with label log-probabilities differing from the reviewed baseline by 1.22 and training loss by about 0.20. The contract used SDPA, the default attention path; running only the eager attention variant missed the bug. The regression was fixed on September 28, 2026, and reverting the fix on a proof branch reproduced the same differences.

What happened

No source tells the story step by step yet.

What was done

No source states an action or fix.

Risks

Sorted by rule from the case's fields; not yet read from the sources.

Controls

Not yet read for controls. Controls that mitigate the primary risk:

Application

Independent check of task results · Drift monitoring · Activity logs · Live behaviour monitoring · Grounding and fact checks · Change review and separation of duties

Similar incidents

All cases of this kind ›

Evidence

No source states: a step-by-step account, when it was found, how many records were exposed, the direct loss, a count of the other parties affected, any court case, what set it off, what was done.

Show every field, with its source and grade

The AI system

Model
UMT5
C one secondary source states it
Software around the model
Transformers
C one secondary source states it
Stage of use
in live use
C one secondary source states it

What happened

When it happened
2026-07-30
C one secondary source states it
Earliest source we hold
2026-11-03
D inferred by us from the described behaviour, reason shown
How long it lasted
P60D
C one secondary source states it
Who caught it
automated monitoring
C one secondary source states it
Themes
attention mask regression, training data leakage, model integration contract, ci regression detection, transformers library
C one secondary source states it
Cause
a permission, scope or wiring error
C one secondary source states it
Cause in detail
Enabling SDPA for T5 in Transformers changed the attention path so that UMT5's decoder could attend to future tokens.
C one secondary source states it
Who was responsible
the model provider
C one secondary source states it
What went wrong
got worse over time
C one secondary source states it

Impact

Severity
minor
C one secondary source states it
Can it be undone
yes
C one secondary source states it
Why this severity
The regression was contained to the library's main branch with no crash and no third party affected.
C one secondary source states it

Notes on gaps

The document is a technical blog post about a test-infrastructure project (transformers-mic) and describes one concrete regression: the UMT5 SDPA causal-mask bug. The document also mentions a Whisper assisted-decoding bug and synthetic fault-injection results, but these are research/evaluation findings without a dated concrete incident, so they are not recorded as separate incidents. The LLM-drafted usage code is described as human-reviewed and is not an incident. Extractor proposed values without quotes; dropped: .

LR-2026-0833 · version 1 · published 2026-11-04 after automatic checks; not yet checked field by field by a person · JSON