What is an activation function in LLMs

Activation functions are the unsung workhorses of modern large language models. They are the mathematical nonlinearity that turns a sequence of linear transformations into rich, expressive representations capable of capturing the subtleties of language, code, and multimodal signals. In transformer-based LLMs, activation functions live inside the feed-forward networks that sit between attention layers. Their choice shapes how information flows through the model, how quickly a system learns during pretraining, and how efficiently it can be run in production at scale. This masterclass-level look is not about abstract theory alone; it’s about understanding how a single design knob—the activation function—resonates across training dynamics, hardware efficiency, and real-world deployments in systems such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot, and beyond. By tracing the thread from theory to practice, we illuminate why practitioners care about these nonlinearities and how to reason about them when building and deploying AI systems today.

What problem does an activation function solve in an LLM? Put simply, a pure composition of linear layers cannot express nonlinear relationships. Without nonlinearity, a stack of linear transformations collapses into a single linear map, no matter how many layers you add. Activation functions restore the capacity to model complex, hierarchical patterns—things like long-range dependencies in text, nuanced sentiment shifts, or the subtle style cues that distinguish different speakers or domains. In production systems, this expressivity must be attained while meeting strict requirements for stability during training, speed during inference, and compatibility with hardware accelerators and quantization pipelines. The activation function sits at the center of that triad: it must be expressive enough to capture complexity, friendly to gradient-based optimization, and implementable with high-throughput kernels on GPUs or TPUs. In practice, teams responsible for ChatGPT or Gemini must balance these concerns against additional pressures such as drift during continual learning, per-user personalization, and safety constraints that require robust, predictable behavior across diverse inputs.

The activation used in the feed-forward networks of transformers has tangible consequences. A function with poor gradient behavior can slow convergence, exacerbate training instabilities, or demand smaller learning rates and longer pretraining cycles—costing money and delaying product readiness. Conversely, a well-behaved activation can enable faster convergence, more stable updates, and more efficient hardware execution through fused kernels and quantization-friendly properties. In real-world deployments, the choice of activation interacts with other engineering decisions: the size of the MLP, whether you use gating mechanisms or mixture-of-experts, how you implement kernel fusion, and how you optimize for latency on cloud GPUs or on-device accelerators. The activation function is not a cosmetic detail; it is a foundational lever that affects the whole lifecycle of a model—from pretraining to fine-tuning to inference at scale.

At a high level, activation functions operate on the outputs of linear transformations to inject nonlinearity. In the transformer’s feed-forward network, an input vector passes through a linear projection to a higher-dimensional space, is transformed by a nonlinear function, and is then projected back down. This small nonlinearity is what gives the network its capacity to model complicated signal relationships. The most widely used nonlinearities in large-scale language models are variants of GELU (Gaussian Error Linear Units) or its fast approximations, along with SiLU (the Swish function), and gated forms like GLU variants. GELU, for example, blends linear and nonlinear behavior in a smooth, probabilistic way, which helps preserve small gradient signals and fosters stable learning across the enormous scales of modern LLMs. The SiLU / Swish family offers a smooth curve that naturally propagates small gradients for mid-range activations and retains strong gradients for large activations, a combination many practitioners find advantageous for deep networks with millions or billions of parameters.

Beyond the vanilla choices, researchers and engineers blend in gating-based activations to increase expressivity without a prohibitive increase in parameters. Gated Linear Units (GLU) and their variants, such as SwiGLU (SiLU-Gated Linear Unit), factor the activation into two streams: one that gates information and another that carries transformed features. In practical terms, a gate—often implemented with a sigmoid or similar function—controls how much of the transformed signal passes forward. This structure allows the model to selectively amplify or suppress particular dimensions of the representation, a capability that can yield stronger representational capacity without a proportional growth in compute or memory. In production models, gating is not just a trick for better accuracy; it can be a practical tool for managing activation dynamics in extremely large networks, influencing how quickly a model learns during pretraining and how robust it is during long-horizon generation tasks.

The engineering reality is that the exact activation function is rarely chosen in isolation. It interacts with initialization schemes, normalization layers, dropout, and the distribution of intermediate activations. It also has a direct impact on hardware performance: some activations map cleanly to highly optimized kernels, while others require more compute or less-friendly precision. For example, GELU and SiLU have been fused into fast kernels on GPUs, allowing the large inner loops of an LLM’s FFN to run at the speeds demanded by services like ChatGPT or copilots in real time. Operators must weigh the theoretical expressivity of a given nonlinearity against the pragmatics of kernel fusion, memory bandwidth, and quantization fidelity when moving from research to deployment.

From a learning dynamics perspective, the slope and curvature of the activation near zero influence how gradients propagate back through the network. Functions with gentle slopes help maintain gradient flow when activations saturate, while sharper transitions can help with more decisive gating or faster learning in certain regimes. In practice, teams experiment with different nonlinearities to discover what yields the best stability and speed for their data and compute profile. This is not a gimmick but a principled variable in the model-building process, one that scales with model size, data diversity, and the diversity of tasks that the system must perform—from casual conversation to structured code completion in Copilot or domain-specific reasoning in enterprise assistants.

From an engineering standpoint, the activation function becomes part of a larger pipeline that must support rapid iteration, robust training, and scalable inference. In modern ML frameworks, the default choice for many researchers has been GELU, with exact and approximate implementations that are carefully optimized for hardware. In production, teams often rely on fused kernels that combine the linear projection, nonlinearity, and projection back into a single pass, reducing memory bandwidth and latency. This fusion is critical for services that generate long-form text or perform real-time interactions, where milliseconds matter. When deploying across fleets of GPUs or TPUs, the ability to keep activations efficient directly translates into lower energy consumption and higher throughput, enabling more users to be served with the same hardware budget.

Hardware-conscious design also shapes the choice between exact and approximate activations. The exact GELU is numerically precise but computationally heavier, while approximate variants provide substantial speedups with negligible impact on final model quality at scale. This practical trade-off is a recurring theme in production AI: a tiny numerical discrepancy is often far less costly than a twofold difference in latency. In practice, teams must benchmark activations under realistic workloads, including long-context generation, streaming attention, and MoE routing scenarios, to determine which nonlinearity aligns with their latency budgets and hardware capabilities. For large, developer-facing models like Copilot or Claude, these choices accumulate to meaningful improvements in user experience and cost efficiency.

Another engineering hotspot is quantization and mixed-precision training. Activation functions interact with the dynamic range of activations across layers, and some activations are more quantization-friendly than others. In many production systems, operators tune the activation to preserve accuracy under 8-bit or lower representations, sometimes leveraging calibration or fine-tuning to recover any modest degradation. This is particularly relevant for systems that must run on edge devices or in tightly constrained data-center environments, where every drop in memory footprint or compute cycles counts toward enabling richer features, longer context windows, or more concurrent users. In short, the activation function is a real-world lever that teams tune hand-in-hand with kernel fusion, precision strategies, and hardware stack to achieve production-grade reliability and speed.

Leading systems such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Copilot illustrate how activation choices ripple through product design and user experience. In chat-based assistants, the need for coherent, context-aware generation across long conversations makes stable gradient flow during training indispensable, and GELU-like nonlinearities have become a reliable default because they couple well with large-scale pretraining objectives and the normalization schemes that accompany them. In multitask and domain-adaptation scenarios, gating activations offer an additional degree of control: the network can learn to selectively route information through certain dimensions, enabling more robust responses when facing diverse prompts, ranging from casual dialogue to highly technical code synthesis. The upshot for practitioners is clear—start with a strong, well-supported nonlinearity for stability, and explore gating-based variants if the project demands greater expressivity without an untenable increase in compute.

Open-source and enterprise deployments alike also inform practical workflows around experimentation and maintenance. For instance, a team building a code-assistant feature akin to Copilot might begin with GELU or SiLU in the feed-forward blocks, then test SwiGLU as a drop-in alternative to unlock sharper gating in tokens that carry code semantics. In a multimodal setting such as the audio-visual capabilities explored by systems inspired by OpenAI Whisper and image-focused models like Midjourney, the nonlinearities in the FFN can influence how effectively the model fuses information across modalities. While attention remains the primary mechanism for mixing tokens, the FFN’s activation function still shapes the richness of the resulting representations that feed into decoding or generation pipelines. In practice, teams collect ablation data, monitor training stability, and validate inference-time latency across a representative mix of prompts, tasks, and languages to converge on the activation strategy that best serves their target users and workloads.

In real-world deployment, the activation function also interacts with continual learning and safety systems. A stable activation function helps avoid abrupt drift in generation quality as models are updated or fine-tuned on streaming data. At the same time, gating activations can provide a controllable mechanism to prioritize certain kinds of information during generation, which can be valuable for alignment and safety monitoring. Companies that maintain large-scale assistants or enterprise copilots must balance expressivity with reliability, and the activation function is a critical piece of that balance. Even in less glamorous corners, such as the optimization of streaming referrals or sentiment-aware customer support agents, the same principle holds: nonlinearity influences how gracefully a system adapts to new contexts and maintains faithful behavior across long-running sessions.

Looking ahead, activation functions are unlikely to remain a fixed, one-size-fits-all choice. As models grow more modular and employ techniques such as mixture-of-experts, dynamic routing, and per-layer specialization, the possibility of layer-specific activations becomes increasingly compelling. Imagine a future where some transformer layers leverage a gating-based activation to emphasize certain linguistic cues, while others use a more traditional GELU to maximize smooth gradient flow. Such a hybrid could balance expressivity and stability with unprecedented finesse, enabling even larger models to train efficiently and generalize better across diverse tasks.

Another trend is learnable or adaptive activations. A small portion of the activation landscape could be made trainable, allowing the network to tune its nonlinearity during pretraining or fine-tuning to the statistics of the data. While this approach raises questions about interpretability and optimization stability, it holds the promise of more efficient representations and better usage of compute budgets. In practice, teams would need to monitor for brittleness and ensure that any such adaptivity remains aligned with safety and reliability goals. As hardware continues to evolve, there is also space for even tighter integration between activations and kernel implementations, potentially enabling real-time adaptation of nonlinearity to workload characteristics or energy constraints without sacrificing model quality.

From a product perspective, the activation choice will increasingly tie into personalization, efficiency, and automation. Systems like Gemini and Claude are likely to experiment with dynamic activation strategies that adapt to user context or task intent, prioritizing speed for casual prompts and expressivity for complex reasoning. In the world of real-world deployment—where latency budgets, cost-per-request, and user expectations collide—clean, hardware-aligned nonlinearity design will remain a practical, indispensable lever. It’s not just about enabling smarter chat; it’s about delivering robust, scalable AI that can sustain broad adoption in high-stakes domains such as healthcare, finance, and enterprise software.

Activation functions are a foundational design choice in LLMs, shaping how signals propagate through deep networks, how training behaves at scale, and how efficiently models run in production. From the GELU family that dominates modern pretrained systems to gating-based variants that offer extra expressivity, the nonlinearity inside the feed-forward networks is a practical bridge between theory and engineering. Understanding this bridge helps developers reason about training stability, convergence speed, and the feasibility of deploying ever-larger models in real-world workflows. As practitioners, we calibrate activations in concert with initialization, normalization, precision, and kernel fusion to build systems that perform reliably under load, adapt to user needs, and scale with data and compute budgets. The best activation choice is not a single universal answer; it is a tuned compromise shaped by your model size, data, hardware, and deployment constraints—an optimization you iterate on with rigor as you push from prototype to production.

Avichala exists to empower learners and professionals to explore applied AI, Generative AI, and real-world deployment insights through hands-on guidance, project-driven curricula, and access to a global community of practitioners. If you’re eager to deepen your understanding of activation functions and how they thread through modern AI systems—from research notebooks to production pipelines—visit www.avichala.com to discover insights, practical workflows, and opportunities to connect with mentors and peers who are turning theory into transformative, real-world AI solutions.