dijksterhuis
Joined 7 years ago
Karma
4,153
Submissions
1,433
Member since
Mar 13
Recent submissions
Comment · 1 month ago
> The model weights change as the model goes through the training process.
Yes. They do. You are absolutely right about that.
But the model architecture doesn't change as a result of the training process. A piston doesn't suddenly turn into a digital watch as a result of tuning an engine. Similarly, the transformer part of a GPT model doesn't suddenly turn into something else as a result of optimizing a loss function.
---
i've got other stuff to do, so i'm stopping here.
Comment · 1 month ago
> Nobody says a system or product works a certain way and means the system while it's half built. "Bridges drop cars in the water!". Right.
To understand how an engine works, it's important to understand what a piston does as part of the engine.
Comment · 1 month ago
> The finished product is something which has been through post training.
again, the finished product wasn't what was discussed by GP, and you didn't clarify that you were switching to discussing RL (which is still probabilistic btw)
Comment · 1 month ago
> "it's not just a next-token predictor because a bunch of the training isn't about predicting the next token."
clever procedures on top of the base transformer architecture.
i used simplified words/phrases to summarise the same thing you two were saying (the intent being: here's a version that may be digestible when discussing with others).
apparently that means i'm wrong though, no idea why because it seems you've decided to be dismissive rather than constructively elaborate on why this simplified and digestible version might be wrong :shrug:
Comment · 1 month ago
From GP, i.e. the context for this local part of the thread
> Autoregressive LLMs generate tokens one at a time, disputing this is just plain wrong.
next-token prediction i.e. the bit built during pre-training.
at no point in your reply to GP did you specify that you were referring to post-training. respectfully, it seems like this one is on you pal :shrug:
> GPT-2 didn't use any reinforcement learning and is often given as a toy example. That release was 2019 and models now go through a various phases of training with different objective functions and optimizers.
yeah. so? the toy example works for pre-training. see above.
Comment · 1 month ago
they are cleverly arranged / configured next-most-likely-token predictors, possibly with some clever procedures / attachments on top.
Comment · 1 month ago
prediction is a very specific term of art in the field of machine learning. generally speaking, machine learning models like LLMs are based on probability; performing a statistical prediction of the likely y given some input x
Probability(y | x)
> Prediction implies there is some "truth" or event or something that you can test against
there absolutely is a ground truth during training. the core predict-the-next-most-likely-token part of an LLM has a ground truth next-token. that's why you don't end up with generated text like: fish spurious send cattle chocolate phone happy meaning ball orange board canada.
> optimizes to predict the next token in training data
that is the optimization goal in training the next-most-likely-token core of an LLM, it basically translates to maximise the likelihood of predicting the next token x_i given the previous tokens
L(θ) = −log Π^n_{i=1} f_θ(x_i | x1, ..., x_{i−1})
(edit: sorry for the ADHD edits)
sometimes makes weird machine music. sometimes makes machines do weird things. sometimes makes music machines do weird things.