Predicting Emergent Abilities with Infinite Resolution Evaluation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.03262v3
• Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 13:43:59 GMT
• Title: Predicting Emergent Abilities with Infinite Resolution Evaluation
• Authors: Shengding Hu, Xin Liu, Xu Han, Xinrong Zhang, Chaoqun He, Weilin Zhao, Yankai Lin, Ning Ding, Zebin Ou, Guoyang Zeng, Zhiyuan Liu, Maosong Sun,
• Abstract summary: We introduce PassUntil, an evaluation strategy with theoretically infinite resolution, through massive sampling in the decoding phase. We predict the performance of the 2.4B model on code generation with merely 0.05% deviation before training starts. We identify a kind of accelerated emergence whose scaling curve cannot be fitted by standard scaling law function.
• Score: 85.89911520190711
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The scientific scale-up of large language models (LLMs) necessitates a comprehensive understanding of their scaling properties. However, the existing literature on the scaling properties only yields an incomplete answer: optimization loss decreases predictably as the model size increases, in line with established scaling law; yet no scaling law for task has been established and the task performances are far from predictable during scaling. Task performances typically show minor gains on small models until they improve dramatically once models exceed a size threshold, exemplifying the ``emergent abilities''. In this study, we discover that small models, although they exhibit minor performance, demonstrate critical and consistent task performance improvements that are not captured by conventional evaluation strategies due to insufficient measurement resolution. To measure such improvements, we introduce PassUntil, an evaluation strategy with theoretically infinite resolution, through massive sampling in the decoding phase. With PassUntil, we conduct a quantitative investigation into the scaling law of task performance. The investigation contains two parts. Firstly, a strict task scaling law that is not conventionally known to exist, is identified, enhancing the predictability of task performances. Remarkably, we are able to predict the performance of the 2.4B model on code generation with merely 0.05\% deviation before training starts, which is the first systematic attempt to verify predictable scaling proposed by GPT-4's report. Secondly, we are able to study emergent abilities quantitatively. We identify a kind of accelerated emergence whose scaling curve cannot be fitted by standard scaling law function and has a increasing speed. We then examine two hypothesis and imply that the ``multiple circuits hypothesis'' might be responsible for the accelerated emergence.

Related papers

• Predicting Emergent Capabilities by Finetuning [98.9684114851891]
  We find that finetuning language models can shift the point in scaling at which emergence occurs towards less capable models. We validate this approach using four standard NLP benchmarks. We find that, in some cases, we can accurately predict whether models trained with up to 4x more compute have emerged.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-25T01:48:09Z)
• A Simple Model of Inference Scaling Laws [1.3597551064547502]
  We study scaling laws in the context of inference, specifically how performance improves with multiple inference attempts. Our simple framework sets the ground for incorporating inference scaling with other known scaling laws.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T18:00:06Z)
• Observational Scaling Laws and the Predictability of Language Model Performance [51.2336010244645]
  We propose an observational approach that bypasses model training and instead builds scaling laws from 100 publically available models. We show that several emergent phenomena follow a smooth, sigmoidal behavior and are predictable from small models. We show how to predict the impact of post-training interventions like Chain-of-Thought and Self-Consistency as language model capabilities continue to improve.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-17T17:49:44Z)
• Language Model Cascades: Token-level uncertainty and beyond [65.38515344964647]
  Recent advances in language models (LMs) have led to significant improvements in quality on complex NLP tasks. Cascading offers a simple strategy to achieve more favorable cost-quality tradeoffs. We show that incorporating token-level uncertainty through learned post-hoc deferral rules can significantly outperform simple aggregation strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-15T21:02:48Z)
• Inverse Scaling: When Bigger Isn't Better [80.42834197416444]
  Large language models (LMs) show predictable improvements to overall loss with increased scale. We present evidence for the claim that LMs may show inverse scaling, or worse task performance with increased scale.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-15T20:11:23Z)
• Modeling Uncertain Feature Representation for Domain Generalization [49.129544670700525]
  We show that our method consistently improves the network generalization ability on multiple vision tasks. Our methods are simple yet effective and can be readily integrated into networks without additional trainable parameters or loss constraints.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-16T14:25:02Z)
• Scaling Laws Under the Microscope: Predicting Transformer Performance from Small Scale Experiments [42.793379799720434]
  We investigate whether scaling laws can be used to accelerate model development. We find that scaling laws emerge at finetuning time in some NLP tasks. For tasks where scaling laws exist, they can be used to predict the performance of larger models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-13T19:13:00Z)
• Scaling Laws for Deep Learning [1.90365714903665]
  In this thesis we take a systematic approach to address the algorithmic and methodological limitations at the root of these costs. We first demonstrate that deep learning training and pruning are predictable and governed by scaling laws. We then show through the exploration of a noiseless realizable case that DL is in fact dominated by error sources very far from the lower error limit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-17T15:37:05Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.