Cerebras-GPT: A Family of Open, Compute-Efficient, Large Language Models
1–10 of 231 posts
Re: Cerebras-GPT: A Family of Open, Compute-Efficient, Large Language Models
#2Re: Cerebras-GPT: A Family of Open, Compute-Efficient, Large Language Models
#3I'm confused as to why 111 million parameter models are trained with the Chinchilla formula. Why not scale up the training data? If you're training smaller models, surely optimizing performance is better than optimizing total compute.
Seems like a silly misunderstanding of the Chinchilla paper, but I'm sure I'm missing something
Re: Cerebras-GPT: A Family of Open, Compute-Efficient, Large Language Models
#4Re: Cerebras-GPT: A Family of Open, Compute-Efficient, Large Language Models
#5> Trained using the Chinchilla formula, these models provide the highest accuracy for a given compute budget. I'm confused as to why 111 million parameter models are trained with the Chinchilla formula. Why not scale up the training data? If you're training smaller models, surely optimizing performance is better than optimizing total compute. Seems like a silly misunderstanding of the Chinchilla paper, but I'm sure I…
Money quote for those who don't want to read the whole thing:
'''
When people talk about training a Chinchilla-optimal model, this is what they mean: training a model that matches their estimates for optimality. They estimated the optimal model size for a given compute budget, and the optimal number of training tokens for a given compute budget.
However, when we talk about “optimal” here, what is meant is “what is the cheapest way to obtain a given loss level, in FLOPS.” In practice though, we don’t care about the answer! This is exactly the answer you care about if you’re a researcher at DeepMind/FAIR/AWS who is training a model with the goal of reaching the new SOTA so you can publish a paper and get promoted. If you’re training a model with the goal of actually deploying it, the training cost is going to be dominated by the inference cost. This has two implications:
1) there is a strong incentive to train smaller models which fit on single GPUs
2) we’re fine trading off training time efficiency for inference time efficiency (probably to a ridiculous extent).
Chinchilla implicitly assumes that the majority of the total cost of ownership (TCO) for a LLM is the training cost. In practice, this is only the case if you’re a researcher at a research lab who doesn’t support products (e.g. FAIR/Google Brain/DeepMind/MSR). For almost everyone else, the amount of resources spent on inference will dwarf the amount of resources spent during training.
'''
Re: Cerebras-GPT: A Family of Open, Compute-Efficient, Large Language Models
#6Has anyone tried this? I have 96GB of GPU memory; will that be enough to run the biggest model?
Re: Cerebras-GPT: A Family of Open, Compute-Efficient, Large Language Models
#7Has anyone tried this? I have 96GB of GPU memory; will that be enough to run the biggest model?
With 96GB of memory you should also be able to fine-tune it (possibly some tricks like gradient accumulation and/or checkpointing might be needed), but you have to be ready for many days of computation...
Re: Cerebras-GPT: A Family of Open, Compute-Efficient, Large Language Models
#8(it's all blurry)
Re: Cerebras-GPT: A Family of Open, Compute-Efficient, Large Language Models
#9Re: Cerebras-GPT: A Family of Open, Compute-Efficient, Large Language Models
#10This “AI spring” is really snowballing with the crazy nouns and terminology. Alpaca, llama and now chinchilla??