Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized characteristic dialect preparing (NLP), fueling applications extending from summarization and interpretation to conversational operators and retrieval-based frameworks. These models, like GPT and BERT, have illustrated extraordinary capabilities in understanding and producing human-like content.
Handling long text sequences efficiently is crucial for document summarization, retrieval-augmented question answering, and multi-turn dialogues in chatbots. Yet, traditional LLM architectures often struggle with these scenarios due to memory and computation limitations and their ability to process positional information in extensive input sequences. These bottlenecks demand innovative architectural strategies to ensure scalability, efficiency, and seamless user interactions.
This article explores the science behind LLM architectures, focusing on optimizing them for handling long text inputs and enabling effective conversational dynamics. From foundational concepts like positional embeddings to advanced solutions like rotary position encoding (RoPE), we’ll delve into the design choices that empower LLMs to excel in modern NLP challenges.
Learning Objective
Understand the challenges traditional LLM architectures face in processing long text sequences and dynamic conversational flows.
Explore the role of positional embeddings in enhancing LLM performance for sequential tasks.
Learn techniques to optimize LLMs for handling long text inputs to enhance performance and coherence in applications.
Learn about advanced techniques like Rotary Position Embedding (RoPE) and ALiBi for optimizing LLMs for long input handling.
Recognize the significance of architecture-level design choices in improving the efficiency and scalability of LLMs.
Discover how self-attention mechanisms adapt to account for positional information in extended sequences.
Deploying large language models (LLMs) effectively is pivotal to address challenges such as tall computational taking a toll, memory utilization, and inactivity, which can prevent their viable versatility. The taking after procedures are especially impactful in overcoming these challenges:
Flash Attention: This technique optimizes memory and computational efficiency by minimizing redundant operations during the attention mechanism. It allows models to process information faster and handle larger contexts without overwhelming hardware resources.
Low-Rank Approximations: This strategy altogether diminishes the number of parameters by approximating the parameter lattices with lower positions, driving to a lighter demonstration while keeping up execution.
Quantization: This includes decreasing the exactness of numerical computations, such as utilizing 8-bit or 4-bit integrability rather than 16-bit or 32-bit drifts, which diminishes asset utilization and vitality utilization without the noteworthy misfortune of showing precision.
Longer-Context Handling (RoPE and ALiBi): Techniques like Rotary Position Embeddings (RoPE) and Attention with Linear Biases (ALiBi) extend the model’s capacity to hold and utilize data over longer settings, which is basic for applications like record summarization and question-answering.
Efficient Hardware Utilization: Optimizing deployment environments by leveraging GPUs, TPUs, or other accelerators designed for deep learning tasks can significantly boost model efficiency.
By adopting these strategies, organizations can deploy LLMs effectively while balancing cost, performance, and scalability, enabling broader use of AI in real-world applications.
Traditional vs. Modern Positional Embedding Techniques
We will explore the comparison between traditional vs. modern positional embeddings techniques below:
Traditional Absolute Positional Embeddings:
Sinusoidal Embeddings: This technique uses a fixed mathematical function (sine and cosine) to encode the position of tokens. It is computationally efficient but struggles with handling longer sequences or extrapolating beyond training length.
Learned Embeddings: These are learned during training, with each position having a unique embedding. While flexible, they may not generalize well for very long sequences beyond the model’s predefined position range.
Modern Solutions:
Relative Positional Embeddings: Instead of encoding absolute positions, this technique captures the relative distance between tokens. It allows the model to better handle variable-length sequences and adapt to different contexts without being restricted by predefined positions.
Rotary Position Embedding (RoPE):
Mechanism: RoPE introduces a rotation-based mechanism to handle positional encoding, allowing the model to generalize better across varying sequence lengths. This rotation makes it more effective for long sequences and avoids the limitations of traditional embeddings.
Advantages: It offers greater flexibility, better performance with long-range dependencies, and more efficient handling of longer input sequences.
ALiBi (Attention with Linear Biases):
Simple Explanation: ALiBi introduces linear biases directly in the attention mechanism, allowing the model to focus on different parts of the sequence based on their relative positions.
How it Improves Long-Sequence Handling: By linearly biasing attention scores, ALiBi allows the model to efficiently handle long sequences without the need for complex positional encoding, improving both memory usage and model efficiency for long inputs.
Visual or Tabular Comparison of Traditional vs. Modern Embeddings
Below we will have a look on comparison of traditional vs. modern embeddings below:
Feature
Traditional Absolute Embeddings
Modern Embeddings (RoPE, ALiBi, etc.)
Type of Encoding
Fixed (Sinusoidal or Learned)
Relative (RoPE, ALiBi)
Handling Long Sequences
Struggles with extrapolation beyond training length
Efficient with long-range dependencies
Generalization
Limited generalization for unseen sequence lengths
Better generalization, adaptable to varied sequence lengths
Memory Usage
Higher memory consumption due to static encoding
More memory efficient, especially with ALiBi
Computational Complexity
Low (Sinusoidal), moderate (Learned)
Lower for long sequences (RoPE, ALiBi)
Flexibility
Less flexible for dynamic or long-range contexts
Highly flexible, able to adapt to varying sequence sizes
Application
Suitable for shorter, fixed-length sequences
Ideal for tasks with long and variable-length inputs
Case Studies or References Showing Performance Gains with RoPE and ALiBi
Rotary Position Embedding (RoPE):
Case Study 1: In the paper “RoFormer: Rotary Position Embedding for Transformer Models,” the authors demonstrated that RoPE significantly improved performance on long-sequence tasks like language modeling. The ability of RoPE to generalize better over long sequences without requiring extra computational resources made it a more efficient choice over traditional embeddings.
Performance Gain: RoPE provided up to 4-6% better accuracy in handling sequences longer than 512 tokens, compared to models using traditional positional encodings.
ALiBi (Attention with Linear Biases):
Case Study 2: In “ALiBi: Attention with Linear Biases for Efficient Long-Range Sequence Modeling,” the introduction of linear bias in the attention mechanism allowed the model to efficiently process sequences without relying on positional encoding. ALiBi reduced the memory overhead and improved the scalability of the model for tasks like machine translation and summarization.
Performance Gain: ALiBi demonstrated up to 8% faster training times and significant reductions in memory usage while maintaining or improving model performance on long-sequence benchmarks.
These advancements showcase how modern positional embedding techniques like RoPE and ALiBi not only address the limitations of traditional methods but also enhance the scalability and efficiency of large language models, especially when dealing with long inputs.
Harnessing the Power of Lower Precision
LLMs are composed of vast matrices and vectors representing their weights. These weights are typically stored in float32, bfloat16, or float16 precision. Memory requirements can be estimated as follows:
Float32 Precision: Memory required = 4 * X GB, where X is the number of model parameters (in billions).
bfloat16/Float16 Precision: Memory required = 2 * X GB.
Examples of Memory Usage in bfloat16 Precision:
GPT-3: 175 billion parameters, ~350 GB VRAM.
Bloom: 176 billion parameters, ~352 GB VRAM.
LLaMA-2-70B: 70 billion parameters, ~140 GB VRAM.
Falcon-40B: 40 billion parameters, ~80 GB VRAM.
MPT-30B: 30 billion parameters, ~60 GB VRAM.
Starcoder: 15.5 billion parameters, ~31 GB VRAM.
Given that the NVIDIA A100 GPU has a maximum of 80 GB VRAM, larger models need tensor parallelism or pipeline parallelism to operate efficiently.
prompt = "Question: Please write a function in Python that transforms bytes to Giga bytes.\n\nAnswer:"
result = pipe(prompt, max_new_tokens=60)[0]["generated_text"][len(prompt):]
result
There are various quantization techniques, which we won’t discuss in detail here, but in general, all quantization techniques work as follows:
Quantize all weights to the target precision.
Load the quantized weights, and pass the input sequence of vectors in bfloat16 precision.
Dynamically dequantize weights to bfloat16 to perform the computation with their input vectors in bfloat16 precision.
Quantize the weights again to the target precision after computation with their inputs.
In a nutshell, this means that inputs-weight matrix multiplications, with X being the inputs, W being a weight matrix and Y being the output:
Y=X∗W are changed to Y=X∗dequantize(W);quantize(W) for every matrix multiplication. Dequantization and re-quantization is performed sequentially for all weight matrices as the inputs run through the network graph.
# !pip install bitsandbytes
model = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained("bigcode/octocoder", load_in_8bit=True, low_cpu_mem_usage=True, pad_token_id=0)
pipe = pipeline("text-generation", model=model, tokenizer=tokenizer)
result = pipe(prompt, max_new_tokens=60)[0]["generated_text"][len(prompt):]
result
Flash Attention optimizes the attention mechanism by enhancing memory efficiency and leveraging better GPU memory utilization. This approach allows for:
Reduced memory footprint: Drastically minimizes memory overhead by handling attention computation more efficiently.
Higher performance: Significant improvements in speed during inference.
system_prompt = """Below are a series of dialogues between various people and an AI technical assistant.
The assistant tries to be helpful, polite, honest, sophisticated, emotionally aware, and humble but knowledgeable.
The assistant is happy to help with code questions and will do their best to understand exactly what is needed.
It also tries to avoid giving false or misleading information, and it caveats when it isn't entirely sure about the right answer.
That said, the assistant is practical really does its best, and doesn't let caution get too much in the way of being useful.
The Starcoder models are a series of 15.5B parameter models trained on 80+ programming languages from The Stack (v1.2) (excluding opt-out requests).
The model uses Multi Query Attention, was trained using the Fill-in-the-Middle objective, and with 8,192 tokens context window for a trillion tokens of heavily deduplicated data.
-----
Question: Write a function that takes two lists and returns a list that has alternating elements from each input list.
Answer: Sure. Here is a function that does that.
def alternating(list1, list2):
results = []
for i in range(len(list1)):
results.append(list1[i])
results.append(list2[i])
return results
Question: Can you write some test cases for this function?
Answer: Sure, here are some tests.
assert alternating([10, 20, 30], [1, 2, 3]) == [10, 1, 20, 2, 30, 3]
assert alternating([True, False], [4, 5]) == [True, 4, False, 5]
assert alternating([], []) == []
Question: Modify the function so that it returns all input elements when the lists have uneven length. The elements from the longer list should be at the end.
Answer: Here is the modified function.
def alternating(list1, list2):
results = []
for i in range(min(len(list1), len(list2))):
results.append(list1[i])
results.append(list2[i])
if len(list1) > len(list2):
results.extend(list1[i+1:])
else:
results.extend(list2[i+1:])
return results
-----
"""
import time
start_time = time.time()
result = pipe(long_prompt, max_new_tokens=60)[0]["generated_text"][len(long_prompt):]
print(f"Generated in {time.time() - start_time} seconds.")
result
start_time = time.time()
result = pipe(long_prompt, max_new_tokens=60)[0]["generated_text"][len(long_prompt):]
print(f"Generated in {time.time() - start_time} seconds.")
result
So far, we have explored strategies to improve computational and memory efficiency, including:
Casting weights to a lower precision format.
Implementing a more efficient version of the self-attention algorithm.
Now, we turn our attention to how we can modify the architecture of large language models (LLMs) to optimize them for tasks requiring long text inputs, such as:
Retrieval-augmented question answering,
Summarization,
Chat applications.
Notably, chat interactions necessitate that LLMs not only process long text inputs but also efficiently handle dynamic, back-and-forth dialogue between the user and the model, similar to what ChatGPT accomplishes.
Since modifying the fundamental architecture of an LLM post-training is challenging, making well-considered design decisions upfront is essential. Two primary components in LLM architectures that often become performance bottlenecks for large input sequences are:
Positional embeddings
Key-value cache
Let’s delve deeper into these components.
Improving Positional Embeddings in LLMs
The self-attention mechanism relates each token to others within a text sequence. For instance, the Softmax(QKT) matrix for the input sequence “Hello”, “I”, “love”, “you” could appear as follows:
Hello
I
Love
You
Hello
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.1
I
0.1
0.5
0.2
0.2
Love
0.05
0.3
0.65
0.0
You
0.15
0.25
0.35
0.25
Each word token has a probability distribution indicating how much it attends to other tokens. For example, the word “love” attends to “Hello” with 0.05 probability, “I” with 0.3, and itself with 0.65.
However, without positional embeddings, an LLM struggles to understand the relative positions of tokens, making it hard to distinguish sequences like “Hello I love you” from “You love I hello”. QKT computation relates tokens without considering the positional distance, treating each as equidistant.
To resolve this, positional encodings are introduced, providing numerical cues that help the model understand the order of tokens.
Traditional Positional Embeddings
In the original Attention Is All You Need paper, sinusoidal positional embeddings were proposed, where each vector is defined as a sinusoidal function of its position. These embeddings are added to input sequence vectors as:
Some models, such as BERT, introduced learned positional embeddings, which are learned during training.
Challenges with Absolute Positional Embeddings
Sinusoidal and learned positional embeddings are absolute, encoding unique positions. However, as noted by Huang et al. and Su et al., absolute embeddings can hinder performance for long sequences. Key issues include:
Long Input Limitation: Absolute embeddings perform poorly when handling long sequences since they focus on fixed positions instead of relative distances.
Fixed Training Length: Learned embeddings tie the model to a maximum training length, limiting its ability to generalize to longer inputs.
Advancements: Relative Positional Embeddings
To address these challenges, relative positional embeddings have gained traction. Two notable methods include:
Rotary Position Embedding (RoPE)
ALiBi (Attention with Linear Biases)
Both methods modify the QKT computation to incorporate sentence order directly into the self-attention mechanism, improving how models handle long text inputs.
Rotary Position Embedding (RoPE) encodes positional information by rotating query and key vectors by angles and, respectively, where denote positions:
Here, is a rotational matrix, and is predefined based on the training’s maximum input length.
These approaches enable LLMs to focus on relative distances, improving generalization for longer sequences and facilitating efficient task-specific optimizations.
input_ids = tokenizer(prompt, return_tensors="pt")["input_ids"].to("cuda")
for _ in range(5):
next_logits = model(input_ids)["logits"][:, -1:]
next_token_id = torch.argmax(next_logits,dim=-1)
input_ids = torch.cat([input_ids, next_token_id], dim=-1)
print("shape of input_ids", input_ids.shape)
generated_text = tokenizer.batch_decode(input_ids[:, -5:])
generated_text
past_key_values = None # past_key_values is the key-value cache
generated_tokens = []
next_token_id = tokenizer(prompt, return_tensors="pt")["input_ids"].to("cuda")
for _ in range(5):
next_logits, past_key_values = model(next_token_id, past_key_values=past_key_values, use_cache=True).to_tuple()
next_logits = next_logits[:, -1:]
next_token_id = torch.argmax(next_logits, dim=-1)
print("shape of input_ids", next_token_id.shape)
print("length of key-value cache", len(past_key_values[0][0])) # past_key_values are of shape [num_layers, 0 for k, 1 for v, batch_size, length, hidden_dim]
generated_tokens.append(next_token_id.item())
generated_text = tokenizer.batch_decode(generated_tokens)
generated_text
Optimizing LLM architectures for long text inputs and dynamic chat applications is pivotal in advancing their real-world applicability. The challenges of managing extensive input contexts, maintaining computational efficiency, and delivering meaningful conversational interactions necessitate innovative solutions at the architectural level. Techniques like Rotary Position Embedding (RoPE), ALiBi, and Flash Attention illustrate the transformative potential of fine-tuning center components like positional embeddings and self-attention.
As the field proceeds to advance, a center on mixing computational effectiveness with engineering inventiveness will drive the following wave of breakthroughs. By understanding and actualizing these procedures, designers can tackle the total control of LLMs, guaranteeing they are not fair brilliantly but too adaptable, responsive, and common for different real-world applications.
Key Takeaways
Techniques like RoPE and ALiBi improve LLMs’ ability to process longer texts without sacrificing performance.
Innovations like Flash Attention and sliding window attention reduce memory usage, making large models practical for real-world applications.
Optimizing LLMs for long text inputs enhances their ability to maintain context and coherence in extended conversations and complex tasks.
LLMs are evolving to support tasks such as summarization, retrieval, and multi-turn dialogues with better scalability and responsiveness.
Reducing model precision improves computational efficiency while maintaining accuracy, enabling broader adoption.
Balancing architecture design and resource optimization ensures LLMs remain effective for diverse and growing use cases.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q1. 1. What are LLMs, and why are they significant?
A. Large Language Models (LLMs) are AI models outlined to get it and create human-like content. They are critical due to their capacity to perform a wide extend of assignments, from replying questions to imaginative composing, making them flexible apparatuses for different businesses.
Q2. How do RoPE and ALiBi improve LLMs?
A. RoPE (Rotary Positional Encoding) and ALiBi (Attention with Linear Biases) enhance LLMs by improving their capability to handle long contexts, ensuring efficient processing of extended text without losing coherence.
Q3. What is Flash Attention, and how does it optimize memory usage?
A. Flash Attention is an algorithm that computes attention more efficiently, significantly reducing memory consumption and speeding up processing for large-scale models.
Q4. Why is quantization important for LLMs?
A. Quantization decreases the accuracy of demonstrate weights (e.g., from 32-bit to 8-bit), which brings down computational necessities and memory utilization whereas keeping up shows execution, empowering arrangement on smaller gadgets.
Q5. What challenges remain for scaling LLMs further?
A. Major challenges include managing computational and memory costs, addressing ethical concerns like bias and misuse, and ensuring models can generalize effectively across diverse tasks and languages.
Q6. How can LLMs be optimized for processing long text inputs effectively?
A. Optimizing LLMs for long text inputs involves techniques like context window expansion, memory mechanisms, and efficient token processing to ensure they maintain coherence and performance during extended conversations or document analysis.
I'm Soumyadarshani Dash, and I'm embarking on an exhilarating journey of exploration within the captivating realm of Data Science. As a dedicated graduate student with a Bachelor's degree in Commerce (B.Com), I have discovered my passion for the enthralling world of data-driven insights.
My dedication to continuous improvement has garnered me a 5⭐ rating on HackerRank, along with accolades from Microsoft. I've also completed courses on esteemed platforms like Great Learning and Simplilearn. As a proud recipient of a virtual internship with TATA through Forage, I'm committed to the pursuit of technical excellence.
Frequently immersed in the intricacies of complex datasets, I take pleasure in crafting algorithms and pioneering inventive solutions. I invite you to connect with me on LinkedIn as we navigate the data-driven universe together!
We use cookies essential for this site to function well. Please click to help us improve its usefulness with additional cookies. Learn about our use of cookies in our Privacy Policy & Cookies Policy.
Show details
Powered By
Cookies
This site uses cookies to ensure that you get the best experience possible. To learn more about how we use cookies, please refer to our Privacy Policy & Cookies Policy.
brahmaid
It is needed for personalizing the website.
csrftoken
This cookie is used to prevent Cross-site request forgery (often abbreviated as CSRF) attacks of the website
Identityid
Preserves the login/logout state of users across the whole site.
sessionid
Preserves users' states across page requests.
g_state
Google One-Tap login adds this g_state cookie to set the user status on how they interact with the One-Tap modal.
MUID
Used by Microsoft Clarity, to store and track visits across websites.
_clck
Used by Microsoft Clarity, Persists the Clarity User ID and preferences, unique to that site, on the browser. This ensures that behavior in subsequent visits to the same site will be attributed to the same user ID.
_clsk
Used by Microsoft Clarity, Connects multiple page views by a user into a single Clarity session recording.
SRM_I
Collects user data is specifically adapted to the user or device. The user can also be followed outside of the loaded website, creating a picture of the visitor's behavior.
SM
Use to measure the use of the website for internal analytics
CLID
The cookie is set by embedded Microsoft Clarity scripts. The purpose of this cookie is for heatmap and session recording.
SRM_B
Collected user data is specifically adapted to the user or device. The user can also be followed outside of the loaded website, creating a picture of the visitor's behavior.
_gid
This cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to store information of how visitors use a website and helps in creating an analytics report of how the website is doing. The data collected includes the number of visitors, the source where they have come from, and the pages visited in an anonymous form.
_ga_#
Used by Google Analytics, to store and count pageviews.
_gat_#
Used by Google Analytics to collect data on the number of times a user has visited the website as well as dates for the first and most recent visit.
collect
Used to send data to Google Analytics about the visitor's device and behavior. Tracks the visitor across devices and marketing channels.
AEC
cookies ensure that requests within a browsing session are made by the user, and not by other sites.
G_ENABLED_IDPS
use the cookie when customers want to make a referral from their gmail contacts; it helps auth the gmail account.
test_cookie
This cookie is set by DoubleClick (which is owned by Google) to determine if the website visitor's browser supports cookies.
_we_us
this is used to send push notification using webengage.
WebKlipperAuth
used by webenage to track auth of webenagage.
ln_or
Linkedin sets this cookie to registers statistical data on users' behavior on the website for internal analytics.
JSESSIONID
Use to maintain an anonymous user session by the server.
li_rm
Used as part of the LinkedIn Remember Me feature and is set when a user clicks Remember Me on the device to make it easier for him or her to sign in to that device.
AnalyticsSyncHistory
Used to store information about the time a sync with the lms_analytics cookie took place for users in the Designated Countries.
lms_analytics
Used to store information about the time a sync with the AnalyticsSyncHistory cookie took place for users in the Designated Countries.
liap
Cookie used for Sign-in with Linkedin and/or to allow for the Linkedin follow feature.
visit
allow for the Linkedin follow feature.
li_at
often used to identify you, including your name, interests, and previous activity.
s_plt
Tracks the time that the previous page took to load
lang
Used to remember a user's language setting to ensure LinkedIn.com displays in the language selected by the user in their settings
s_tp
Tracks percent of page viewed
AMCV_14215E3D5995C57C0A495C55%40AdobeOrg
Indicates the start of a session for Adobe Experience Cloud
s_pltp
Provides page name value (URL) for use by Adobe Analytics
s_tslv
Used to retain and fetch time since last visit in Adobe Analytics
li_theme
Remembers a user's display preference/theme setting
li_theme_set
Remembers which users have updated their display / theme preferences
We do not use cookies of this type.
_gcl_au
Used by Google Adsense, to store and track conversions.
SID
Save certain preferences, for example the number of search results per page or activation of the SafeSearch Filter. Adjusts the ads that appear in Google Search.
SAPISID
Save certain preferences, for example the number of search results per page or activation of the SafeSearch Filter. Adjusts the ads that appear in Google Search.
__Secure-#
Save certain preferences, for example the number of search results per page or activation of the SafeSearch Filter. Adjusts the ads that appear in Google Search.
APISID
Save certain preferences, for example the number of search results per page or activation of the SafeSearch Filter. Adjusts the ads that appear in Google Search.
SSID
Save certain preferences, for example the number of search results per page or activation of the SafeSearch Filter. Adjusts the ads that appear in Google Search.
HSID
Save certain preferences, for example the number of search results per page or activation of the SafeSearch Filter. Adjusts the ads that appear in Google Search.
DV
These cookies are used for the purpose of targeted advertising.
NID
These cookies are used for the purpose of targeted advertising.
1P_JAR
These cookies are used to gather website statistics, and track conversion rates.
OTZ
Aggregate analysis of website visitors
_fbp
This cookie is set by Facebook to deliver advertisements when they are on Facebook or a digital platform powered by Facebook advertising after visiting this website.
fr
Contains a unique browser and user ID, used for targeted advertising.
bscookie
Used by LinkedIn to track the use of embedded services.
lidc
Used by LinkedIn for tracking the use of embedded services.
bcookie
Used by LinkedIn to track the use of embedded services.
aam_uuid
Use these cookies to assign a unique ID when users visit a website.
UserMatchHistory
These cookies are set by LinkedIn for advertising purposes, including: tracking visitors so that more relevant ads can be presented, allowing users to use the 'Apply with LinkedIn' or the 'Sign-in with LinkedIn' functions, collecting information about how visitors use the site, etc.
li_sugr
Used to make a probabilistic match of a user's identity outside the Designated Countries
MR
Used to collect information for analytics purposes.
ANONCHK
Used to store session ID for a users session to ensure that clicks from adverts on the Bing search engine are verified for reporting purposes and for personalisation
We do not use cookies of this type.
Cookie declaration last updated on 24/03/2023 by Analytics Vidhya.
Cookies are small text files that can be used by websites to make a user's experience more efficient. The law states that we can store cookies on your device if they are strictly necessary for the operation of this site. For all other types of cookies, we need your permission. This site uses different types of cookies. Some cookies are placed by third-party services that appear on our pages. Learn more about who we are, how you can contact us, and how we process personal data in our Privacy Policy.
