HackerPapers

arXiv:2212.12017cs.CL

OPT-IML: Scaling Language Model Instruction Meta Learning through the Lens of Generalization

Srinivasan Iyer, Xi Victoria Lin, Ramakanth Pasunuru, Todor Mihaylov, Daniel Simig, Ping Yu, Kurt Shuster, Tianlu Wang, Qing Liu, Punit Singh Koura, Xian Li, Brian O'Horo, Gabriel Pereyra, Jeff Wang, Christopher Dewan, Asli Celikyilmaz, Luke Zettlemoyer, Ves Stoyanov

Abstract

Recent work has shown that fine-tuning large pre-trained language models on a collection of tasks described via instructions, a.k.a. instruction-tuning, improves their zero and few-shot generalization to unseen tasks. However, there is a limited understanding of the performance trade-offs of different decisions made during the instruction-tuning process. These decisions include the scale and diversity of the instruction-tuning benchmark, different task sampling strategies, fine-tuning with and without demonstrations, training using specialized datasets for reasoning and dialogue, and finally, the fine-tuning objectives themselves. In this paper, we characterize the effect of instruction-tuning decisions on downstream task performance when scaling both model and benchmark sizes. To this end, we create OPT-IML Bench: a large benchmark for Instruction Meta-Learning (IML) of 2000 NLP tasks consolidated into task categories from 8 existing benchmarks, and prepare an evaluation framework to measure three types of model generalizations: to tasks from fully held-out categories, to held-out tasks from seen categories, and to held-out instances from seen tasks. Through the lens of this framework, we first present insights about instruction-tuning decisions as applied to OPT-30B and further exploit these insights to train OPT-IML 30B and 175B, which are instruction-tuned versions of OPT. OPT-IML demonstrates all three generalization abilities at both scales on four different evaluation benchmarks with diverse tasks and input formats -- PromptSource, FLAN, Super-NaturalInstructions, and UnifiedSKG. Not only does it significantly outperform OPT on all benchmarks but is also highly competitive with existing models fine-tuned on each specific benchmark. We release OPT-IML at both scales, together with the OPT-IML Bench evaluation framework.

arXiv comments
56 pages. v2->v3: fix OPT-30B evaluation results across benchmarks (previously we reported lower performance of this model due to an evaluation pipeline bug)
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.CLComputation and Language

On Hacker News

Linked by 3 identifiable commenters in 3 comments across 2 threads, from Jan 2023 to Jan 2023.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments2 threads

    • rough steps: 1. collect a very large dataset, see: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/6Fpvch8RR29qLEWNH/chinchilla... . scrape, de-duplicate, clean, wrangle. this is a lot of work regardless of $. 2. get on a call with the sales teams of major cloud providers to procure a few…

      karpathyView on HNParent context

    • Thanks for laying out the plan. I was trying to understand the cost of each of these steps below and started wondering about the following: > rough steps: > 1. collect a very large dataset, see: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/6Fpvch8RR29qLEWNH/chinchilla... . scrape…

      vvrmView on HNParent context

    • In terms of quality, I think BLOOMZ, or mT0, are the best open-source ones. The non-finetuned BLOOM does not appear favorably (in English) compared to GLM or OPT, which both have published weights: https://crfm.stanford.edu/helm/v0.1.0/?group=mmlu and Flan-T5 is above OPT-IML…

      espadrineView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.