A walk through of the DeltaNet family of linear attention variants
11–20 of 134 posts
Re: A walk through of the DeltaNet family of linear attention variants
#12You know its a doozy when the author writes a disclaimer at the top saying that bra-ket notation was chosen in order to make the algorithm and data structures clearer.
Re: A walk through of the DeltaNet family of linear attention variants
#13I always thought that the jump from LSTM/GRU -> Attention wasn't a particularly big one. Instead of partial unroll, do a full unroll. Why not (because it's too expensive, that's why not). Every component was known, and everybody anywhere near ML knew perfectly well why NOT to try that: because you just don't have the compute to fully unroll an LSTM. From that point attention is optimized (they key-query mechanic). The big innovation is not so much the mechanism itself but realizing the parallelize-ability of it.
It's sort of like if one would today make the "improvement" to attention to replace they key-query-value mechanic by just dropping it while making the entire context the latent space. That will outperform attention, nearly guaranteed. It'll also make even Google's cluster networks meltdown. Attention is one of those innovations that came mostly from realizing you had better hardware than everybody else and asking yourself how to use it. It's still quite the accomplishment, they had to get it working. But nobody else was really capable of making this leap.
Re: A walk through of the DeltaNet family of linear attention variants
#14I could never get this about modern machine/deep learning or even the Transformers. Yes, it's not exactly rocket science, but when I see the data flow diagrams, it's not clear what is calculated in real time or multiple steps. Is it really one big computation f(g(h(x)))?
Re: A walk through of the DeltaNet family of linear attention variants
#15I could never get this about modern machine/deep learning or even the Transformers. Yes, it's not exactly rocket science, but when I see the data flow diagrams, it's not clear what is calculated in real time or multiple steps. Is it really one big computation f(g(h(x)))?
Re: A walk through of the DeltaNet family of linear attention variants
#16No, you couldn't have. There are plenty of ML innovations that when push comes to shove only depend on having access to more compute, but this is one of the worst examples I've ever seen. I always thought that the jump from LSTM/GRU -> Attention wasn't a particularly big one. Instead of partial unroll, do a full unroll. Why not (because it's too expensive, that's why not). Every component was known, and everybody any…
Re: A walk through of the DeltaNet family of linear attention variants
#17Re: A walk through of the DeltaNet family of linear attention variants
#18Re: A walk through of the DeltaNet family of linear attention variants
#19Many will likely disagree with me, but inconsistent notation (across papers!) is to me friction. At least in this article the author explicitly explains the notation at the very start...that is not always the case. Rarely, even.
EDIT: Didn't even notice the notation switch, much appreciated.
Re: A walk through of the DeltaNet family of linear attention variants
#20I could never get this about modern machine/deep learning or even the Transformers. Yes, it's not exactly rocket science, but when I see the data flow diagrams, it's not clear what is calculated in real time or multiple steps. Is it really one big computation f(g(h(x)))?
Each token prediction is one big function call. Then you just recursively generate more tokens until run out of context or the model predicts a next token indicating end of sequence. Technically the model outputs a matrix where the last row is a probability distribution, but I’m counting sampling from it as part of the chain. Hundreds of billions of dollars has gone into just making the function fatter and gradually changing pieces here and there.