REVIEW 3 cited by
Training Trajectories of Language Models Across Scales
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
read the original abstract
Scaling up language models has led to unprecedented performance gains, but little is understood about how the training dynamics change as models get larger. How do language models of different sizes learn during pre-training? Why do larger language models demonstrate more desirable behaviors? In this paper, we analyze the intermediate training checkpoints of differently sized OPT models (Zhang et al.,2022)--from 125M to 175B parameters--on next-token prediction, sequence-level generation, and downstream tasks. We find that 1) at a given perplexity and independent of model sizes, a similar subset of training tokens see the most significant reduction in loss, with the rest stagnating or showing double-descent behavior; 2) early in training, all models learn to reduce the perplexity of grammatical sequences that contain hallucinations, with small models halting at this suboptimal distribution and larger ones eventually learning to assign these sequences lower probabilities; 3) perplexity is a strong predictor of in-context learning performance on 74 multiple-choice tasks from BIG-Bench, and this holds independent of the model size. Together, these results show that perplexity is more predictive of model behaviors than model size or training computation.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
How much do language models memorize?
A compression-based measurement puts GPT-style model memorization capacity at roughly 3.6 bits per parameter, with membership inference success following a sigmoid in the dataset-to-capacity ratio.
-
Capability Salience Vector: Fine-grained Alignment of Loss and Capabilities for Downstream Task Scaling Law
A fitted token-level loss weighting, optimized against known model accuracies, predicts held-out downstream task performance more accurately than mean validation loss on five of six benchmarks.
-
Fairness Dynamics During Training
Gender bias in Pythia-6.9b grows sharply after about 80k training steps even as general performance improves, and stopping earlier could trade 1.7% LAMBADA accuracy for a large fairness gain.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.