Difference between revisions of "AI understanding"

From GISAXS
Jump to: navigation, search
(Semantic Vectors)
(Hidden State)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 173: Line 173:
 
* 2021-02: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06701 Explaining Neural Scaling Laws] (Google DeepMind)
 
* 2021-02: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.06701 Explaining Neural Scaling Laws] (Google DeepMind)
 
* 2022-03: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.15556 Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Models] (Chinchilla, Google DeepMind)
 
* 2022-03: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.15556 Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Models] (Chinchilla, Google DeepMind)
 +
* 2025-03: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.04715 Predictable Scale: Part I -- Optimal Hyperparameter Scaling Law in Large Language Model Pretraining]
  
 
=Information Processing/Storage=
 
=Information Processing/Storage=
Line 182: Line 183:
 
* 2024-10: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.01687 Deciphering the Factors Influencing the Efficacy of Chain-of-Thought: Probability, Memorization, and Noisy Reasoning]. CoT involves both memorization and (probabilitic) reasoning
 
* 2024-10: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.01687 Deciphering the Factors Influencing the Efficacy of Chain-of-Thought: Probability, Memorization, and Noisy Reasoning]. CoT involves both memorization and (probabilitic) reasoning
 
* 2024-11: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.16679 Do Large Language Models Perform Latent Multi-Hop Reasoning without Exploiting Shortcuts?]
 
* 2024-11: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.16679 Do Large Language Models Perform Latent Multi-Hop Reasoning without Exploiting Shortcuts?]
 +
* 2025-03: [https://www.arxiv.org/abs/2503.03961 A Little Depth Goes a Long Way: The Expressive Power of Log-Depth Transformers]
  
 
==Tokenization==
 
==Tokenization==
Line 199: Line 201:
 
==Hidden State==
 
==Hidden State==
 
* 2025-02: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.06258 Emergent Response Planning in LLM]: They show that the latent representation contains information beyond that needed for the next token (i.e. the model learns to "plan ahead" and encode information relevant to future tokens)
 
* 2025-02: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.06258 Emergent Response Planning in LLM]: They show that the latent representation contains information beyond that needed for the next token (i.e. the model learns to "plan ahead" and encode information relevant to future tokens)
 +
* 2025-03: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.02854 (How) Do Language Models Track State?]
  
 
==Function Approximation==
 
==Function Approximation==

Latest revision as of 15:02, 9 March 2025

Interpretability

Mechanistic Interpretability

Semanticity

Counter-Results

Reward Functions

Symbolic and Notation

Mathematical

Geometric

Topography

Challenges

GYe31yXXQAABwaZ.jpeg

Heuristic Understanding

Emergent Internal Model Building

Semantic Directions

Directions, e.g.: f(king)-f(man)+f(woman)=f(queen) or f(sushi)-f(Japan)+f(Italy)=f(pizza)

Task vectors:

Feature Geometry Reproduces Problem-space

Capturing Physics

Theory of Mind

Skeptical

Information Processing

Generalization

Grokking

Tests of Resilience to Dropouts/etc.

  • 2024-02: Explorations of Self-Repair in Language Models
  • 2024-06: What Matters in Transformers? Not All Attention is Needed
    • Removing entire transformer blocks leads to significant performance degradation
    • Removing MLP layers results in significant performance degradation
    • Removing attention layers causes almost no performance degradation
    • E.g. half of attention layers are deleted (48% speed-up), leads to only 2.4% decrease in the benchmarks
  • 2024-06: The Remarkable Robustness of LLMs: Stages of Inference?
    • They intentionally break the network (swapping layers), yet it continues to work remarkably well. This suggests LLMs are quite robust, and allows them to identify different stages in processing.
    • They also use these interventions to infer what different layers are doing. They break apart the LLM transformer layers into four stages:
      • Detokenization: Raw tokens are converted into meaningful entities that take into account local context (especially using nearby tokens).
      • Feature engineering: Features are progressively refined. Factual knowledge is leveraged.
      • Prediction ensembling: Predictions (for the ultimately-selected next-token) emerge. A sort of consensus voting is used, with “prediction neurons” and "suppression neurons" playing a major role in upvoting/downvoting.
      • Residual sharpening: The semantic representations are collapsed into specific next-token predictions. There is a strong emphasis on suppression neurons eliminating options. The confidence is calibrated.
    • This structure can be thought of as two halves (being roughly dual to each other): the first half broadens (goes from distinct tokens to a rich/elaborate concept-space) and the second half collapses (goes from rich concepts to concrete token predictions).

Semantic Vectors

Other

Scaling Laws

Information Processing/Storage

Tokenization

For numbers/math

Learning/Training

Cross-modal knowledge transfer

Hidden State

Function Approximation

Failure Modes

Jagged Frontier

Psychology

Allow LLM to think

In-context Learning

Reasoning (CoT, etc.)

See Also