Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
Search - "embeddings"
-
It's still in development. It often says the opposite from what is expected. Try Retoor1b chatbot at https://llm.molodetz.nl
This was result after building bot + chat website from scratch including training with embeddings. Design is generated by GPT, I tried my own but all ugly.
It's quite cool huh? Ask it to write some code for you. It's absolutely terrible. If it's down, try again in 5 minutes. I'm still working on it.
What's the result? I finally have a toolkit to make good/serious bots. Code could be bit better, but that's for other day.
Stack: self written webserver (and yes, you can post a gb to it or ddos it. Not sure if it survives the first one. I should limit requests to one mb anyway. Http headers may officially not be more than 4096 in total) since I know http protocol from my head anyway. Python websockets module. Asyncio, chromadb.
It could have xss issues. Don't care.
Let me know what you think44 -
After a lot of work I figured out how to build the graph component of my LLM. Figured out the basic architecture, how to connect it in, and how to train it. The design and how-to is 100%.
Ironically generating the embeddings is slower than I expect the training itself to take.
A few extensions of the design will also allow bootstrapped and transfer learning, and as a reach, unsupervised learning but I still need to work out the fine details on that.
Right now because of the design of the embeddings (different from standard transformers in a key aspect), they're slow. Like 10 tokens per minute on an i5 (python, no multithreading, no optimization at all, no training on gpu). I've came up with a modification that takes the token embeddings and turns them into hash keys, which should be significantly faster for a variety of reasons. Essentially I generate a tree of all weights, where the parent nodes are the mean of their immediate child nodes, split the tree on lesser-than-greater-than values, and then convert the node values to keys in a hashmap to make lookup very fast.
Weight comparison can be done either directly through tree traversal, or using normalized hamming distance between parent/child weight keys and the lookup weight.
That last bit is designed already and just needs implemented but it is completely doable.
The design itself is 100% attention free incidentally.
I'm outlining the step by step, only the essentials to train a word boundary detector, noun detector, verb detector, as I already considered prior. But now I'm actually able to implement it.
The hard part was figuring out the *graph* part of the model, not the NN part (if you could even call it an NN, which it doesn't fit the definition of, but I don't know what else to call it). Determining what the design would look like, the necessary graph token types, what function they should have, *how* they use the context, how thats calculated, how loss is to be calculated, and how to train it.
I'm happy to report all that is now settled.
I'm hoping to get more work done on it on my day off, but thats seven days away, 9-10 hour shifts, working fucking BurgerKing and all I want to do is program.
And all because no one takes me seriously due to not having a degree.
Fucking aye. What is life.
If I had a laptop and insurance and taxes weren't a thing, I'd go live in my car and code in a fucking mcdonalds or a park all day and not have to give a shit about any of these other externalities like earning minimum wage to pay 25% of it in rent a month and 20% in taxes and other government bullshit.4 -
Heres some research into a new LLM architecture I recently built and have had actual success with.
The idea is simple, you do the standard thing of generating random vectors for your dictionary of tokens, we'll call these numbers your 'weights'. Then, for whatever sentence you want to use as input, you generate a context embedding by looking up those tokens, and putting them into a list.
Next, you do the same for the output you want to map to, lets call it the decoder embedding.
You then loop, and generate a 'noise embedding', for each vector or individual token in the context embedding, you then subtract that token's noise value from that token's embedding value or specific weight.
You find the weight index in the weight dictionary (one entry per word or token in your token dictionary) thats closest to this embedding. You use a version of cuckoo hashing where similar values are stored near each other, and the canonical weight values are actually the key of each key:value pair in your token dictionary. When doing this you align all random numbered keys in the dictionary (a uniform sample from 0 to 1), and look at hamming distance between the context embedding+noise embedding (called the encoder embedding) versus the canonical keys, with each digit from left to right being penalized by some factor f (because numbers further left are larger magnitudes), and then penalize or reward based on the numeric closeness of any given individual digit of the encoder embedding at the same index of any given weight i.
You then substitute the canonical weight in place of this encoder embedding, look up that weights index in my earliest version, and then use that index to lookup the word|token in the token dictionary and compare it to the word at the current index of the training output to match against.
Of course by switching to the hash version the lookup is significantly faster, but I digress.
That introduces a problem.
If each input token matches one output token how do we get variable length outputs, how do we do n-to-m mappings of input and output?
One of the things I explored was using pseudo-markovian processes, where theres one node, A, with two links to itself, B, and C.
B is a transition matrix, and A holds its own state. At any given timestep, A may use either the default transition matrix (training data encoder embeddings) with B, or it may generate new ones, using C and a context window of A's prior states.
C can be used to modify A, or it can be used to as a noise embedding to modify B.
A can take on the state of both A and C or A and B. In fact we do both, and measure which is closest to the correct output during training.
What this *doesn't* do is give us variable length encodings or decodings.
So I thought a while and said, if we're using noise embeddings, why can't we use multiple?
And if we're doing multiple, what if we used a middle layer, lets call it the 'key', and took its mean
over *many* training examples, and used it to map from the variance of an input (query) to the variance and mean of
a training or inference output (value).
But how does that tell us when to stop or continue generating tokens for the output?
Posted on pastebin if you want to read the whole thing (DR wouldn't post for some reason).
In any case I wasn't sure if I was dreaming or if I was off in left field, so I went and built the damn thing, the autoencoder part, wasn't even sure I could, but I did, and it just works. I'm still scratching my head.
https://pastebin.com/xAHRhmfH33 -
I wonder if anyone has considered building a large language model, trained on consuming and generating token sequences that are themselves the actual weights or matrix values of other large language models?
Run Lora to tune it to find and generate plausible subgraphs for specific tasks (an optimal search for weights that are most likely to be initialized by chance to ideal values, i.e. the winning lottery ticket hypothesis).
The entire thing could even be used to prune existing LLM weights, in a generative-adversarial model.
Shit, theres enough embedding and weight data to train a Meta-LLM from scratch at this point.
The sum total of trillions of parameter in models floating around the internet to be used as training data.
If the models and weights are designed to predict the next token, there shouldn't be anything to prevent another model trained on this sort of distribution, from generating new plausible models.
You could even do task-prompt-to-model-task embeddings by training on the weights for task specific models, do vector searches to mix models, etc, and generate *new* models,
not new new text, not new imagery, but new *models*.
It'd be a model for training/inferring/optimizing/generating other models.4 -
Since i needed higher quality data for retoor9b I invested some time in the statistics project. It became quite decent. It's not a silly script anymore.
I also had rank per user regarding popularity (upvotes / post avg). It got lost somehow. I only know that IHateForALiving has second place. Root 10th. Netikras 14th, Lensflare 15th). First place was by not regular user who made one post with six upvotes. That's all. Hihi.
Repository: https://retoor.molodetz.nl/retoor/...
Dataset for LLM: embeddings:https://retoor.molodetz.nl/retoor/...
Graph compilation with ALL users active last few weeks:
https://retoor.molodetz.nl/retoor/...
All generated data by this project: https://retoor.molodetz.nl/retoor/...
Build / latest export status: https://retoor.molodetz.nl/retoor/...
In the LLM dataset you'll see more interesting data for every user like:
Statistics: User(ranter) retoor made 505 contributions to devRant(developer community) what means retoor owns 1.0 percent of contributions on devRant(developer community). The avarage post length of retoor is 219 and total post length is 111037. retoor owns 0.0 percent of content on devRant(developer community).
retoor is 315 times mentioned on devRant(developer comminity).2