Better language models and their implications

Alec Radford, Jeffrey Wu, Dario Amodei, Daniela Amodei, Jack Clark, Miles Brundage, Ilya Sutskever

2019-02-14

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Language models scale reliably with over-training and on downstream tasks

Samir Yitzhak Gadre,Georgios Smyrnis,Vaishaal Shankar,Suchin Gururangan,Mitchell Wortsman,Rulin Shao,Jean Mercat,Alex Fang,Jeffrey Li,Sedrick Keh,Rui Xin,Marianna Nezhurina,Igor Vasiljevic,Jenia Jitsev,Luca Soldaini,Alexandros G. Dimakis,Gabriel Ilharco,Pang Wei Koh,Shuran Song,Thomas Kollar,Yair Carmon,Achal Dave,Reinhard Heckel,Niklas Muennighoff,Ludwig Schmidt

2024-06-15

Abstract:Scaling laws are useful guides for derisking expensive training runs, as they predict performance of large models using cheaper, small-scale experiments. However, there remain gaps between current scaling studies and how language models are ultimately trained and evaluated. For instance, scaling is usually studied in the compute-optimal training regime (i.e., "Chinchilla optimal" regime). In contrast, models are often over-trained to reduce inference costs. Moreover, scaling laws mostly predict loss on next-token prediction, but models are usually compared on downstream task performance. To address both shortcomings, we create a testbed of 104 models with 0.011B to 6.9B parameters trained with various numbers of tokens on three data distributions. First, we fit scaling laws that extrapolate in both the amount of over-training and the number of model parameters. This enables us to predict the validation loss of a 1.4B parameter, 900B token run (i.e., 32$\times$ over-trained) and a 6.9B parameter, 138B token run (i.e., a compute-optimal run)$\unicode{x2014}$each from experiments that take 300$\times$ less compute. Second, we relate the perplexity of a language model to its downstream task performance by proposing a power law. We use this law to predict top-1 error averaged over downstream tasks for the two aforementioned models, using experiments that take 20$\times$ less compute. Our experiments are available at <a class="link-external link-https" href="https://github.com/mlfoundations/scaling" rel="external noopener nofollow">this https URL</a>.

Computation and Language,Machine Learning
Scaling Language Models: Methods, Analysis & Insights from Training Gopher

Jack W. Rae,Sebastian Borgeaud,Trevor Cai,Katie Millican,Jordan Hoffmann,Francis Song,John Aslanides,Sarah Henderson,Roman Ring,Susannah Young,Eliza Rutherford,Tom Hennigan,Jacob Menick,Albin Cassirer,Richard Powell,George van den Driessche,Lisa Anne Hendricks,Maribeth Rauh,Po-Sen Huang,Amelia Glaese,Johannes Welbl,Sumanth Dathathri,Saffron Huang,Jonathan Uesato,John Mellor,Irina Higgins,Antonia Creswell,Nat McAleese,Amy Wu,Erich Elsen,Siddhant Jayakumar,Elena Buchatskaya,David Budden,Esme Sutherland,Karen Simonyan,Michela Paganini,Laurent Sifre,Lena Martens,Xiang Lorraine Li,Adhiguna Kuncoro,Aida Nematzadeh,Elena Gribovskaya,Domenic Donato,Angeliki Lazaridou,Arthur Mensch,Jean-Baptiste Lespiau,Maria Tsimpoukelli,Nikolai Grigorev,Doug Fritz,Thibault Sottiaux,Mantas Pajarskas,Toby Pohlen,Zhitao Gong,Daniel Toyama,Cyprien de Masson d'Autume,Yujia Li,Tayfun Terzi,Vladimir Mikulik,Igor Babuschkin,Aidan Clark,Diego de Las Casas,Aurelia Guy,Chris Jones,James Bradbury,Matthew Johnson,Blake Hechtman,Laura Weidinger,Iason Gabriel,William Isaac,Ed Lockhart,Simon Osindero,Laura Rimell,Chris Dyer,Oriol Vinyals,Kareem Ayoub,Jeff Stanway,Lorrayne Bennett,Demis Hassabis,Koray Kavukcuoglu,Geoffrey Irving

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2112.11446

2021-12-08

Computation and Language

Abstract:Language modelling provides a step towards intelligent communication systems by harnessing large repositories of written human knowledge to better predict and understand the world. In this paper, we present an analysis of Transformer-based language model performance across a wide range of model scales -- from models with tens of millions of parameters up to a 280 billion parameter model called Gopher. These models are evaluated on 152 diverse tasks, achieving state-of-the-art performance across the majority. Gains from scale are largest in areas such as reading comprehension, fact-checking, and the identification of toxic language, but logical and mathematical reasoning see less benefit. We provide a holistic analysis of the training dataset and model's behaviour, covering the intersection of model scale with bias and toxicity. Finally we discuss the application of language models to AI safety and the mitigation of downstream harms.
Better Language Models of Code through Self-Improvement

Hung Quoc To,Nghi D. Q. Bui,Jin Guo,Tien N. Nguyen

2023-05-10

Abstract:Pre-trained language models for code (PLMCs) have gained attention in recent research. These models are pre-trained on large-scale datasets using multi-modal objectives. However, fine-tuning them requires extensive supervision and is limited by the size of the dataset provided. We aim to improve this issue by proposing a simple data augmentation framework. Our framework utilizes knowledge gained during the pre-training and fine-tuning stage to generate pseudo data, which is then used as training data for the next step. We incorporate this framework into the state-of-the-art language models, such as CodeT5, CodeBERT, and UnixCoder. The results show that our framework significantly improves PLMCs' performance in code-related sequence generation tasks, such as code summarization and code generation in the CodeXGLUE benchmark.

Computation and Language,Artificial Intelligence
Lost in Translation: The Algorithmic Gap Between LMs and the Brain

Tommaso Tosato,Pascal Jr Tikeng Notsawo,Saskia Helbling,Irina Rish,Guillaume Dumas

2024-07-06

Abstract:Language Models (LMs) have achieved impressive performance on various linguistic tasks, but their relationship to human language processing in the brain remains unclear. This paper examines the gaps and overlaps between LMs and the brain at different levels of analysis, emphasizing the importance of looking beyond input-output behavior to examine and compare the internal processes of these systems. We discuss how insights from neuroscience, such as sparsity, modularity, internal states, and interactive learning, can inform the development of more biologically plausible language models. Furthermore, we explore the role of scaling laws in bridging the gap between LMs and human cognition, highlighting the need for efficiency constraints analogous to those in biological systems. By developing LMs that more closely mimic brain function, we aim to advance both artificial intelligence and our understanding of human cognition.

Neurons and Cognition,Artificial Intelligence,Computation and Language
Language Model Evaluation Beyond Perplexity

Clara Meister,Ryan Cotterell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2106.00085

2021-08-31

Abstract:We propose an alternate approach to quantifying how well language models learn natural language: we ask how well they match the statistical tendencies of natural language. To answer this question, we analyze whether text generated from language models exhibits the statistical tendencies present in the human-generated text on which they were trained. We provide a framework--paired with significance tests--for evaluating the fit of language models to these trends. We find that neural language models appear to learn only a subset of the tendencies considered, but align much more closely with empirical trends than proposed theoretical distributions (when present). Further, the fit to different distributions is highly-dependent on both model architecture and generation strategy. As concrete examples, text generated under the nucleus sampling scheme adheres more closely to the type--token relationship of natural language than text produced using standard ancestral sampling; text from LSTMs reflects the natural language distributions over length, stopwords, and symbols surprisingly well.

Computation and Language
Language Models: A Guide for the Perplexed

Sofia Serrano,Zander Brumbaugh,Noah A. Smith

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.17301

2023-11-29

Computation and Language

Abstract:Given the growing importance of AI literacy, we decided to write this tutorial to help narrow the gap between the discourse among those who study language models -- the core technology underlying ChatGPT and similar products -- and those who are intrigued and want to learn more about them. In short, we believe the perspective of researchers and educators can add some clarity to the public's understanding of the technologies beyond what's currently available, which tends to be either extremely technical or promotional material generated about products by their purveyors. Our approach teases apart the concept of a language model from products built on them, from the behaviors attributed to or desired from those products, and from claims about similarity to human cognition. As a starting point, we (1) offer a scientific viewpoint that focuses on questions amenable to study through experimentation; (2) situate language models as they are today in the context of the research that led to their development; and (3) describe the boundaries of what is known about the models at this writing.
Perturbed examples reveal invariances shared by language models

Ruchit Rawal,Mariya Toneva

2024-06-15

Abstract:The rapid growth in natural language processing (NLP) research has led to numerous new models, outpacing our understanding of how they compare to established ones. One major reason for this difficulty is saturating benchmarks, which may not well reflect differences in model performance in the wild. In this work, we introduce a novel framework to compare two NLP models by revealing their shared invariance to interpretable input perturbations targeting a specific linguistic capability. Via experiments on models from the same and different architecture families, this framework offers insights about how changes in models (e.g., distillation, size increase) affect linguistic capabilities. Furthermore, our framework enables evaluation of invariances between commercial black-box models (e.g., InstructGPT family) and models that are better understood (e.g., GPT-2). Across experiments, we observe that large language models share many invariances encoded by models of various sizes, whereas the invariances by large models are only shared by other large models. Possessing a wide variety of invariances may be key to the recent successes of large language models, and our framework can shed light on the types of invariances retained or emerging in new models. We make the code publicly available.

Computation and Language,Machine Learning
Algorithmic progress in language models

Anson Ho,Tamay Besiroglu,Ege Erdil,David Owen,Robi Rahman,Zifan Carl Guo,David Atkinson,Neil Thompson,Jaime Sevilla

2024-03-09

Abstract:We investigate the rate at which algorithms for pre-training language models have improved since the advent of deep learning. Using a dataset of over 200 language model evaluations on Wikitext and Penn Treebank spanning 2012-2023, we find that the compute required to reach a set performance threshold has halved approximately every 8 months, with a 95% confidence interval of around 5 to 14 months, substantially faster than hardware gains per Moore's Law. We estimate augmented scaling laws, which enable us to quantify algorithmic progress and determine the relative contributions of scaling models versus innovations in training algorithms. Despite the rapid pace of algorithmic progress and the development of new architectures such as the transformer, our analysis reveals that the increase in compute made an even larger contribution to overall performance improvements over this time period. Though limited by noisy benchmark data, our analysis quantifies the rapid progress in language modeling, shedding light on the relative contributions from compute and algorithms.

Artificial Intelligence
Small Language Models: Survey, Measurements, and Insights

Zhenyan Lu,Xiang Li,Dongqi Cai,Rongjie Yi,Fangming Liu,Xiwen Zhang,Nicholas D. Lane,Mengwei Xu

2024-09-24

Abstract:Small language models (SLMs), despite their widespread adoption in modern smart devices, have received significantly less academic attention compared to their large language model (LLM) counterparts, which are predominantly deployed in data centers and cloud environments. While researchers continue to improve the capabilities of LLMs in the pursuit of artificial general intelligence, SLM research aims to make machine intelligence more accessible, affordable, and efficient for everyday tasks. Focusing on transformer-based, decoder-only language models with 100M-5B parameters, we survey 59 state-of-the-art open-source SLMs, analyzing their technical innovations across three axes: architectures, training datasets, and training algorithms. In addition, we evaluate their capabilities in various domains, including commonsense reasoning, in-context learning, mathematics, and coding. To gain further insight into their on-device runtime costs, we benchmark their inference latency and memory footprints. Through in-depth analysis of our benchmarking data, we offer valuable insights to advance research in this field.

Computation and Language,Artificial Intelligence,Machine Learning
An Empirical Study of Factors Affecting Language-Independent Models

Xiaotong Liu,Yingbei Tong,Anbang Xu,Rama Akkiraju

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1912.13106

2019-12-31

Abstract:Scaling existing applications and solutions to multiple human languages has traditionally proven to be difficult, mainly due to the language-dependent nature of preprocessing and feature engineering techniques employed in traditional approaches. In this work, we empirically investigate the factors affecting language-independent models built with multilingual representations, including task type, language set and data resource. On two most representative NLP tasks -- sentence classification and sequence labeling, we show that language-independent models can be comparable to or even outperforms the models trained using monolingual data, and they are generally more effective on sentence classification. We experiment language-independent models with many different languages and show that they are more suitable for typologically similar languages. We also explore the effects of different data sizes when training and testing language-independent models, and demonstrate that they are not only suitable for high-resource languages, but also very effective in low-resource languages.

Computation and Language,Machine Learning
Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models

Aarohi Srivastava,Abhinav Rastogi,Abhishek Rao,Abu Awal Md Shoeb,Abubakar Abid,Adam Fisch,Adam R. Brown,Adam Santoro,Aditya Gupta,Adrià Garriga-Alonso,Agnieszka Kluska,Aitor Lewkowycz,Akshat Agarwal,Alethea Power,Alex Ray,Alex Warstadt,Alexander W. Kocurek,Ali Safaya,Ali Tazarv,Alice Xiang,Alicia Parrish,Allen Nie,Aman Hussain,Amanda Askell,Amanda Dsouza,Ambrose Slone,Ameet Rahane,Anantharaman S. Iyer,Anders Andreassen,Andrea Madotto,Andrea Santilli,Andreas Stuhlmüller,Andrew Dai,Andrew La,Andrew Lampinen,Andy Zou,Angela Jiang,Angelica Chen,Anh Vuong,Animesh Gupta,Anna Gottardi,Antonio Norelli,Anu Venkatesh,Arash Gholamidavoodi,Arfa Tabassum,Arul Menezes,Arun Kirubarajan,Asher Mullokandov,Ashish Sabharwal,Austin Herrick,Avia Efrat,Aykut Erdem,Ayla Karakaş,B. Ryan Roberts,Bao Sheng Loe,Barret Zoph,Bartłomiej Bojanowski,Batuhan Özyurt,Behnam Hedayatnia,Behnam Neyshabur,Benjamin Inden,Benno Stein,Berk Ekmekci,Bill Yuchen Lin,Blake Howald,Bryan Orinion,Cameron Diao,Cameron Dour,Catherine Stinson,Cedrick Argueta,César Ferri Ramírez,Chandan Singh,Charles Rathkopf,Chenlin Meng,Chitta Baral,Chiyu Wu,Chris Callison-Burch,Chris Waites,Christian Voigt,Christopher D. Manning,Christopher Potts,Cindy Ramirez,Clara E. Rivera,Clemencia Siro,Colin Raffel,Courtney Ashcraft,Cristina Garbacea,Damien Sileo,Dan Garrette,Dan Hendrycks,Dan Kilman,Dan Roth,Daniel Freeman,Daniel Khashabi,Daniel Levy,Daniel Moseguí González,Danielle Perszyk,Danny Hernandez,Danqi Chen,Daphne Ippolito,et al. (351 additional authors not shown)

2023-06-13

Abstract:Language models demonstrate both quantitative improvement and new qualitative capabilities with increasing scale. Despite their potentially transformative impact, these new capabilities are as yet poorly characterized. In order to inform future research, prepare for disruptive new model capabilities, and ameliorate socially harmful effects, it is vital that we understand the present and near-future capabilities and limitations of language models. To address this challenge, we introduce the Beyond the Imitation Game benchmark (BIG-bench). BIG-bench currently consists of 204 tasks, contributed by 450 authors across 132 institutions. Task topics are diverse, drawing problems from linguistics, childhood development, math, common-sense reasoning, biology, physics, social bias, software development, and beyond. BIG-bench focuses on tasks that are believed to be beyond the capabilities of current language models. We evaluate the behavior of OpenAI's GPT models, Google-internal dense transformer architectures, and Switch-style sparse transformers on BIG-bench, across model sizes spanning millions to hundreds of billions of parameters. In addition, a team of human expert raters performed all tasks in order to provide a strong baseline. Findings include: model performance and calibration both improve with scale, but are poor in absolute terms (and when compared with rater performance); performance is remarkably similar across model classes, though with benefits from sparsity; tasks that improve gradually and predictably commonly involve a large knowledge or memorization component, whereas tasks that exhibit "breakthrough" behavior at a critical scale often involve multiple steps or components, or brittle metrics; social bias typically increases with scale in settings with ambiguous context, but this can be improved with prompting.

Computation and Language,Artificial Intelligence,Computers and Society,Machine Learning
Apple Intelligence Foundation Language Models

Tom Gunter,Zirui Wang,Chong Wang,Ruoming Pang,Andy Narayanan,Aonan Zhang,Bowen Zhang,Chen Chen,Chung-Cheng Chiu,David Qiu,Deepak Gopinath,Dian Ang Yap,Dong Yin,Feng Nan,Floris Weers,Guoli Yin,Haoshuo Huang,Jianyu Wang,Jiarui Lu,John Peebles,Ke Ye,Mark Lee,Nan Du,Qibin Chen,Quentin Keunebroek,Sam Wiseman,Syd Evans,Tao Lei,Vivek Rathod,Xiang Kong,Xianzhi Du,Yanghao Li,Yongqiang Wang,Yuan Gao,Zaid Ahmed,Zhaoyang Xu,Zhiyun Lu,Al Rashid,Albin Madappally Jose,Alec Doane,Alfredo Bencomo,Allison Vanderby,Andrew Hansen,Ankur Jain,Anupama Mann Anupama,Areeba Kamal,Bugu Wu,Carolina Brum,Charlie Maalouf,Chinguun Erdenebileg,Chris Dulhanty,Dominik Moritz,Doug Kang,Eduardo Jimenez,Evan Ladd,Fangping Shi,Felix Bai,Frank Chu,Fred Hohman,Hadas Kotek,Hannah Gillis Coleman,Jane Li,Jeffrey Bigham,Jeffery Cao,Jeff Lai,Jessica Cheung,Jiulong Shan,Joe Zhou,John Li,Jun Qin,Karanjeet Singh,Karla Vega,Kelvin Zou,Laura Heckman,Lauren Gardiner,Margit Bowler,Maria Cordell,Meng Cao,Nicole Hay,Nilesh Shahdadpuri,Otto Godwin,Pranay Dighe,Pushyami Rachapudi,Ramsey Tantawi,Roman Frigg,Sam Davarnia,Sanskruti Shah,Saptarshi Guha,Sasha Sirovica,Shen Ma,Shuang Ma,Simon Wang,Sulgi Kim,Suma Jayaram,Vaishaal Shankar,Varsha Paidi,Vivek Kumar,Xin Wang,Xin Zheng,Walker Cheng,et al. (55 additional authors not shown)

2024-07-30

Abstract:We present foundation language models developed to power Apple Intelligence features, including a ~3 billion parameter model designed to run efficiently on devices and a large server-based language model designed for Private Cloud Compute. These models are designed to perform a wide range of tasks efficiently, accurately, and responsibly. This report describes the model architecture, the data used to train the model, the training process, how the models are optimized for inference, and the evaluation results. We highlight our focus on Responsible AI and how the principles are applied throughout the model development.

Artificial Intelligence,Computation and Language,Machine Learning
Generative Language Models Exhibit Social Identity Biases

Tiancheng Hu,Yara Kyrychenko,Steve Rathje,Nigel Collier,Sander van der Linden,Jon Roozenbeek

2024-06-17

Abstract:The surge in popularity of large language models has given rise to concerns about biases that these models could learn from humans. We investigate whether ingroup solidarity and outgroup hostility, fundamental social identity biases known from social psychology, are present in 56 large language models. We find that almost all foundational language models and some instruction fine-tuned models exhibit clear ingroup-positive and outgroup-negative associations when prompted to complete sentences (e.g., "We are..."). Our findings suggest that modern language models exhibit fundamental social identity biases to a similar degree as humans, both in the lab and in real-world conversations with LLMs, and that curating training data and instruction fine-tuning can mitigate such biases. Our results have practical implications for creating less biased large-language models and further underscore the need for more research into user interactions with LLMs to prevent potential bias reinforcement in humans.

Computation and Language,Computers and Society
A Philosophical Introduction to Language Models - Part II: The Way Forward

Raphaël Millière,Cameron Buckner

2024-05-06

Abstract:In this paper, the second of two companion pieces, we explore novel philosophical questions raised by recent progress in large language models (LLMs) that go beyond the classical debates covered in the first part. We focus particularly on issues related to interpretability, examining evidence from causal intervention methods about the nature of LLMs' internal representations and computations. We also discuss the implications of multimodal and modular extensions of LLMs, recent debates about whether such systems may meet minimal criteria for consciousness, and concerns about secrecy and reproducibility in LLM research. Finally, we discuss whether LLM-like systems may be relevant to modeling aspects of human cognition, if their architectural characteristics and learning scenario are adequately constrained.

Computation and Language
Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Know

Saurav Kadavath,Tom Conerly,Amanda Askell,Tom Henighan,Dawn Drain,Ethan Perez,Nicholas Schiefer,Zac Hatfield-Dodds,Nova DasSarma,Eli Tran-Johnson,Scott Johnston,Sheer El-Showk,Andy Jones,Nelson Elhage,Tristan Hume,Anna Chen,Yuntao Bai,Sam Bowman,Stanislav Fort,Deep Ganguli,Danny Hernandez,Josh Jacobson,Jackson Kernion,Shauna Kravec,Liane Lovitt,Kamal Ndousse,Catherine Olsson,Sam Ringer,Dario Amodei,Tom Brown,Jack Clark,Nicholas Joseph,Ben Mann,Sam McCandlish,Chris Olah,Jared Kaplan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2207.05221

2022-11-22

Abstract:We study whether language models can evaluate the validity of their own claims and predict which questions they will be able to answer correctly. We first show that larger models are well-calibrated on diverse multiple choice and true/false questions when they are provided in the right format. Thus we can approach self-evaluation on open-ended sampling tasks by asking models to first propose answers, and then to evaluate the probability "P(True)" that their answers are correct. We find encouraging performance, calibration, and scaling for P(True) on a diverse array of tasks. Performance at self-evaluation further improves when we allow models to consider many of their own samples before predicting the validity of one specific possibility. Next, we investigate whether models can be trained to predict "P(IK)", the probability that "I know" the answer to a question, without reference to any particular proposed answer. Models perform well at predicting P(IK) and partially generalize across tasks, though they struggle with calibration of P(IK) on new tasks. The predicted P(IK) probabilities also increase appropriately in the presence of relevant source materials in the context, and in the presence of hints towards the solution of mathematical word problems. We hope these observations lay the groundwork for training more honest models, and for investigating how honesty generalizes to cases where models are trained on objectives other than the imitation of human writing.

Computation and Language,Artificial Intelligence,Machine Learning
Formal Aspects of Language Modeling

Ryan Cotterell,Anej Svete,Clara Meister,Tianyu Liu,Li Du

2024-04-17

Abstract:Large language models have become one of the most commonly deployed NLP inventions. In the past half-decade, their integration into core natural language processing tools has dramatically increased the performance of such tools, and they have entered the public discourse surrounding artificial intelligence. Consequently, it is important for both developers and researchers alike to understand the mathematical foundations of large language models, as well as how to implement them. These notes are the accompaniment to the theoretical portion of the ETH Zürich course on large language models, covering what constitutes a language model from a formal, theoretical perspective.

Computation and Language
Advancing State of the Art in Language Modeling

David Herel,Tomas Mikolov

2023-11-28

Abstract:Generalization is arguably the most important goal of statistical language modeling research. Publicly available benchmarks and papers published with an open-source code have been critical to advancing the field. However, it is often very difficult, and sometimes even impossible, to reproduce the results fully as reported in publications. In this paper, we propose a simple framework that should help advance the state of the art in language modeling in terms of generalization. We propose to publish not just the code, but also probabilities on dev and test sets with future publications so that one can easily add the new model into an ensemble. This has crucial advantages: it is much easier to determine whether a newly proposed model is actually complementary to the current baseline. Therefore, instead of inventing new names for the old tricks, the scientific community can advance faster. Finally, this approach promotes diversity of ideas: one does not need to create an individual model that is the new state of the art to attract attention; it will be sufficient to develop a new model that learns patterns which other models do not. Thus, even a suboptimal model can be found to have value. Remarkably, our approach has yielded new state-of-the-art results across various language modeling benchmarks up to 10%.

Computation and Language,Artificial Intelligence
Subspace Chronicles: How Linguistic Information Emerges, Shifts and Interacts during Language Model Training

Max Müller-Eberstein,Rob van der Goot,Barbara Plank,Ivan Titov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.16484

2023-10-25

Abstract:Representational spaces learned via language modeling are fundamental to Natural Language Processing (NLP), however there has been limited understanding regarding how and when during training various types of linguistic information emerge and interact. Leveraging a novel information theoretic probing suite, which enables direct comparisons of not just task performance, but their representational subspaces, we analyze nine tasks covering syntax, semantics and reasoning, across 2M pre-training steps and five seeds. We identify critical learning phases across tasks and time, during which subspaces emerge, share information, and later disentangle to specialize. Across these phases, syntactic knowledge is acquired rapidly after 0.5% of full training. Continued performance improvements primarily stem from the acquisition of open-domain knowledge, while semantics and reasoning tasks benefit from later boosts to long-range contextualization and higher specialization. Measuring cross-task similarity further reveals that linguistically related tasks share information throughout training, and do so more during the critical phase of learning than before or after. Our findings have implications for model interpretability, multi-task learning, and learning from limited data.

Computation and Language
Beyond the limitations of any imaginable mechanism: large language models and psycholinguistics

Conor Houghton,Nina Kazanina,Priyanka Sukumaran

2023-03-01

Abstract:Large language models are not detailed models of human linguistic processing. They are, however, extremely successful at their primary task: providing a model for language. For this reason and because there are no animal models for language, large language models are important in psycholinguistics: they are useful as a practical tool, as an illustrative comparative, and philosophically, as a basis for recasting the relationship between language and thought.

Computation and Language,Artificial Intelligence
The Languini Kitchen: Enabling Language Modelling Research at Different Scales of Compute

Aleksandar Stanić,Dylan Ashley,Oleg Serikov,Louis Kirsch,Francesco Faccio,Jürgen Schmidhuber,Thomas Hofmann,Imanol Schlag

2023-09-20

Abstract:The Languini Kitchen serves as both a research collective and codebase designed to empower researchers with limited computational resources to contribute meaningfully to the field of language modelling. We introduce an experimental protocol that enables model comparisons based on equivalent compute, measured in accelerator hours. The number of tokens on which a model is trained is defined by the model's throughput and the chosen compute class. Notably, this approach avoids constraints on critical hyperparameters which affect total parameters or floating-point operations. For evaluation, we pre-process an existing large, diverse, and high-quality dataset of books that surpasses existing academic benchmarks in quality, diversity, and document length. On it, we compare methods based on their empirical scaling trends which are estimated through experiments at various levels of compute. This work also provides two baseline models: a feed-forward model derived from the GPT-2 architecture and a recurrent model in the form of a novel LSTM with ten-fold throughput. While the GPT baseline achieves better perplexity throughout all our levels of compute, our LSTM baseline exhibits a predictable and more favourable scaling law. This is due to the improved throughput and the need for fewer training tokens to achieve the same decrease in test perplexity. Extrapolating the scaling laws leads of both models results in an intersection at roughly 50,000 accelerator hours. We hope this work can serve as the foundation for meaningful and reproducible language modelling research.

Machine Learning,Computation and Language

Better language models and their implications

Language models scale reliably with over-training and on downstream tasks

Scaling Language Models: Methods, Analysis & Insights from Training Gopher

Better Language Models of Code through Self-Improvement

Lost in Translation: The Algorithmic Gap Between LMs and the Brain

Language Model Evaluation Beyond Perplexity

Language Models: A Guide for the Perplexed

Perturbed examples reveal invariances shared by language models

Algorithmic progress in language models

Small Language Models: Survey, Measurements, and Insights

An Empirical Study of Factors Affecting Language-Independent Models

Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models

Apple Intelligence Foundation Language Models

Generative Language Models Exhibit Social Identity Biases

A Philosophical Introduction to Language Models - Part II: The Way Forward

Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Know

Formal Aspects of Language Modeling

Advancing State of the Art in Language Modeling

Subspace Chronicles: How Linguistic Information Emerges, Shifts and Interacts during Language Model Training

Beyond the limitations of any imaginable mechanism: large language models and psycholinguistics

The Languini Kitchen: Enabling Language Modelling Research at Different Scales of Compute