Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have made fundamental changes in human life. The attention scheme is one of the key components over all the LLMs, such as BERT, GPT-1, Transformers, GPT-2, 3, 3.5 and 4. Inspired by previous theoretical study of static version of the attention multiplication problem [Zandieh, Han, Daliri, and Karbasi ICML 2023, Alman and Song NeurIPS 2023]. In this work, we formally define a dynamic version of attention matrix multiplication problem. There are matrices $Q,K, V \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times d}$, they represent query, key and value in LLMs. In each iteration we update one entry in $K$ or $V$. In the query stage, we receive $(i,j) \in [n] \times [d]$ as input, and want to answer $(D^{-1} A V)_{i,j}$, where $A:=\exp(QK^\top) \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n}$ is a square matrix and $D := \mathrm{diag}(A {\bf 1}_n) \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n}$ is a diagonal matrix. Here ${\bf 1}_n$ denote a length-$n$ vector that all the entries are ones.We provide two results: an algorithm and a conditional lower bound. - On one hand, inspired by the lazy update idea from [Demetrescu and Italiano FOCS 2000, Sankowski FOCS 2004, Cohen, Lee and Song STOC 2019, Brand SODA 2020], we provide a data-structure that uses $O(n^{\omega(1,1,\tau)-\tau})$ amortized update time, and $O(n^{1+\tau})$ worst-case query time, where $n^{\omega(1,1,\tau)}$ denotes $\mathrm{Tmat}(n,n,n^\tau)$ with matrix multiplication exponent $\omega$ and $\tau$ denotes a constant in $(0,1]$.- On the other hand, show that unless the hinted matrix vector multiplication conjecture [Brand, Nanongkai and Saranurak FOCS 2019] is false, there is no algorithm that can use both $O(n^{\omega(1,1,\tau) - \tau- \Omega(1)})$ amortized update time, and $O(n^{1+\tau-\Omega(1)})$ worst query time. In conclusion, our algorithmic result is conditionally optimal unless hinted matrix vector multiplication conjecture is false.One notable difference between prior work [Alman and Song NeurIPS 2023] and our work is, their techniques are from the area of fine-grained complexity, and our techniques are not. Our algorithmic techniques are from recent work in convex optimization, e.g. solving linear programming. Our hardness techniques are from the area of dynamic algorithms.