Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Improving Multi-candidate Speculative Decoding

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2409.10644 v3 pith:WLQSNITK submitted 2024-09-16 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords modeldraftmulti-candidatetargetgenerationmcsddecodingdynamic
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Speculative Decoding (SD) is a technique to accelerate the inference of Large Language Models (LLMs) by using a lower complexity draft model to propose candidate tokens verified by a larger target model. To further improve efficiency, Multi-Candidate Speculative Decoding (MCSD) improves upon this by sampling multiple candidate tokens from the draft model at each step and verifying them in parallel, thus increasing the chances of accepting a token and reducing generation time. Existing MCSD methods rely on the draft model to initialize the multi-candidate sequences and use static length and tree attention structure for draft generation. However, such an approach suffers from the draft and target model's output distribution differences, especially in a dynamic generation context. In this work, we introduce a new version of MCSD that includes a target model initialized multi-candidate generation, a dynamic sliced topology-aware causal mask for dynamic length adjustment, and decision models to optimize early stopping. We experimented with our method on Llama 2-7B and its variants and observed a maximum 27.5% speedup compared to our MCSD baseline across three benchmarks with Llama 2-7B as the target model and JackFram 68M as the draft model. Additionally, we evaluate the effects of using the target model initialized multi-candidate process with different draft models on output quality.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Pith tools