Daily Papers

Large Language Models increasingly rely on distributed techniques for their training and inference. These techniques require communication across devices which can reduce scaling efficiency as the number of devices increases. While some distributed techniques can overlap, and thus, hide this communication with independent computations, techniques such as Tensor Parallelism (TP) inherently serialize communication with model execution. One approach to hide this serialized communication is to interleave it with the producer operation (of the communicated data) in a fine-grained manner. However, this fine-grained interleaving of communication and computation in software can be difficult. Furthermore, as with any concurrent execution, it requires compute and memory resources to be shared between computation and communication, causing resource contention that reduces overlapping efficacy. To overcome these challenges, we propose T3 which applies hardware-software co-design to transparently overlap serialized communication while minimizing resource contention with compute. T3 transparently fuses producer operations with the subsequent communication via a simple configuration of the producer's output address space and requires minor software changes. At the hardware level, T3 adds a lightweight track and trigger mechanism to orchestrate the producer's compute, and communication. It further uses compute-enhanced memories for communication's attendant compute. As a result, T3 reduces resource contention, and efficiently overlaps serialized communication with computation. For important Transformer models like T-NLG, T3 speeds up communication-heavy sublayers by 30% geomean (max 47%) and reduces data movement by 22% geomean (max 36%). Furthermore, T3's benefits persist as models scale: geomean 29% for sublayers in sim500-billion parameter models, PALM and MT-NLG.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown significant progress in reasoning tasks. However, recent studies show that transformers and LLMs fail catastrophically once reasoning problems exceed modest complexity. We revisit these findings through the lens of large reasoning models (LRMs) -- LLMs fine-tuned with incentives for step-by-step argumentation and self-verification. LRM performance on graph and reasoning benchmarks such as NLGraph seem extraordinary, with some even claiming they are capable of generalized reasoning and innovation in reasoning-intensive fields such as mathematics, physics, medicine, and law. However, by more carefully scaling the complexity of reasoning problems, we show existing benchmarks actually have limited complexity. We develop a new dataset, the Deep Reasoning Dataset (DeepRD), along with a generative process for producing unlimited examples of scalable complexity. We use this dataset to evaluate model performance on graph connectivity and natural language proof planning. We find that the performance of LRMs drop abruptly at sufficient complexity and do not generalize. We also relate our LRM results to the distributions of the complexities of large, real-world knowledge graphs, interaction graphs, and proof datasets. We find the majority of real-world examples fall inside the LRMs' success regime, yet the long tails expose substantial failure potential. Our analysis highlights the near-term utility of LRMs while underscoring the need for new methods that generalize beyond the complexity of examples in the training distribution.

Large Language Model (LLM) integrations into applications like Microsoft365 suite and Google Workspace for creating/processing documents, emails, presentations, etc. has led to considerable enhancements in productivity and time savings. But as these integrations become more more complex, it is paramount to ensure that the quality of output from the LLM-integrated applications are relevant and appropriate for use. Identifying the need to develop robust evaluation approaches for natural language generation, wherein references/ground labels doesn't exist or isn't amply available, this paper introduces a novel framework called "SAGEval" which utilizes a critiquing Agent to provide feedback on scores generated by LLM evaluators. We show that the critiquing Agent is able to rectify scores from LLM evaluators, in absence of references/ground-truth labels, thereby reducing the need for labeled data even for complex NLG evaluation scenarios, like the generation of JSON-structured forms/surveys with responses in different styles like multiple choice, likert ratings, single choice questions, etc.

Language models have steadily increased in size over the past few years. They achieve a high level of performance on various natural language processing (NLP) tasks such as question answering and summarization. Large language models (LLMs) have been used for generation and can now output human-like text. Due to this, there are other downstream tasks in the realm of dialog that can now harness the LLMs' language understanding capabilities. Dialog evaluation is one task that this paper will explore. It concentrates on prompting with LLMs: BLOOM, OPT, GPT-3, Flan-T5, InstructDial and TNLGv2. The paper shows that the choice of datasets used for training a model contributes to how well it performs on a task as well as on how the prompt should be structured. Specifically, the more diverse and relevant the group of datasets that a model is trained on, the better dialog evaluation performs. This paper also investigates how the number of examples in the prompt and the type of example selection used affect the model's performance.