Scaling Inference-Efficient Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.18107v1
• Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2025 03:16:44 GMT
• Title: Scaling Inference-Efficient Language Models
• Authors: Song Bian, Minghao Yan, Shivaram Venkataraman,
• Abstract summary: We show that model architecture affects inference latency, where models of the same size can have up to 3.5x difference in latency. We modify the Chinchilla scaling laws to co-optimize the model parameter count, the number of training tokens, and the model architecture. We release the Morph-1B model, which improves inference latency by 1.8x while maintaining accuracy on downstream tasks compared to open-source models.
• Score: 3.271571137474847
• License:
• Abstract: Scaling laws are powerful tools to predict the performance of large language models. However, current scaling laws fall short of accounting for inference costs. In this work, we first show that model architecture affects inference latency, where models of the same size can have up to 3.5x difference in latency. To tackle this challenge, we modify the Chinchilla scaling laws to co-optimize the model parameter count, the number of training tokens, and the model architecture. Due to the reason that models of similar training loss exhibit gaps in downstream evaluation, we also propose a novel method to train inference-efficient models based on the revised scaling laws. We perform extensive empirical studies to fit and evaluate our inference-aware scaling laws. We vary model parameters from 80M to 1B, training tokens from 1.6B to 30B, and model shapes, training a total of 63 models. Guided by our inference-efficient scaling law and model selection method, we release the Morph-1B model, which improves inference latency by 1.8x while maintaining accuracy on downstream tasks compared to open-source models, pushing the Pareto frontier of accuracy-latency tradeoff.

Related papers

• Scaling Laws for Precision [73.24325358259753]
  We devise "precision-aware" scaling laws for both training and inference. For inference, we find that the degradation introduced by post-training quantization increases as models are trained on more data. For training, our scaling laws allow us to predict the loss of a model with different parts in different precisions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-07T00:10:10Z)
• A Hitchhiker's Guide to Scaling Law Estimation [56.06982415792523]
  Scaling laws predict the loss of a target machine learning model by extrapolating from easier-to-train models with fewer parameters or smaller training sets. We estimate more than 1000 scaling laws, then derive a set of best practices for estimating scaling laws in new model families.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-15T17:59:10Z)
• 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)
• More Compute Is What You Need [3.184416958830696]
  We propose a new scaling law that suggests model performance depends mostly on the amount of compute spent for transformer-based models. We predict that (a) for inference efficiency, training should prioritize smaller model sizes and larger training datasets, and (b) assuming the exhaustion of available web datasets, scaling the model size might be the only way to further improve model performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-30T12:05:48Z)
• Language models scale reliably with over-training and on downstream tasks [121.69867718185125]
  Scaling laws are useful guides for derisking expensive training runs. However, there remain gaps between current studies and how language models are trained. In contrast, scaling laws mostly predict loss on inference, but models are usually compared on downstream task performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-13T13:54:00Z)
• A Dynamical Model of Neural Scaling Laws [79.59705237659547]
  We analyze a random feature model trained with gradient descent as a solvable model of network training and generalization. Our theory shows how the gap between training and test loss can gradually build up over time due to repeated reuse of data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-02T01:41:38Z)
• Training Trajectories of Language Models Across Scales [99.38721327771208]
  Scaling up language models has led to unprecedented performance gains. How do language models of different sizes learn during pre-training? Why do larger language models demonstrate more desirable behaviors?
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-19T19:16:29Z)
• 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 Acoustic Models [7.906034575114518]
  Recent work has shown that autoregressive generative models with cross-entropy objective functions exhibit smooth power-law relationships. We show that acoustic models trained with an auto-predictive coding loss behave as if they are subject to similar scaling laws.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-11T18:59:24Z)

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.