Re:The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Al...
by bitL on Monday April 10, 2023 @04:31AM
(#35510298)
> Why would we expect to get comparable performance with models a fraction of the size and a pittance of the fine tuning?
LLaMA incorporated new techniques that make 65B perform way better than GPT-3's 175B so the model size argument is not very strong.
Re:The LLama Effect: Leak Sparked a Series of Open Source Al...
by lhl on Monday April 10, 2023 @05:51AM
(#35510659)
It's worth pointing out that size isn't everything. From Meta's benchmarking [1] LLaMA 33B outperforms GPT-3 175B, Gopher 280B, Chinchilla 70B and even matches PaLM 540B on a bunch of common evals. Those interested in doing more comparisons can look at https://crfm.stanford.edu/helm/latest/?group=core_scenarios and https://paperswithcode.com/paper/llama-open-and-efficient-fo... to see where it sits (with some GPT 3.5 and 4 numbers here: https://paperswithcode.com/paper/gpt-4-technical-report-1)
I'd agree the secret sauce for how great the newest services perform is probably in the fine-tuning. We're seeing almost daily releases of fine-tuning data sets, training methods and models (at lower and lower costs) so I'm personally pretty optimistic that we'll be seeing some big improvement in self-hosted LLM performance pretty quickly.
[1] https://ar5iv.labs.arxiv.org/html/2302.13971#:~:text=Table%2....
That said, it’s clear that replicating GPT4+ performance is within the resources of a number of large tech orgs.
And the smaller models can definitely still be useful for tasks.