A Thorough Examination of Decoding Methods in the Era of LLMs
2402.06925
0
0
Abstract
Decoding methods play an indispensable role in converting language models from next-token predictors into practical task solvers. Prior research on decoding methods, primarily focusing on task-specific models, may not extend to the current era of general-purpose large language models (LLMs). Moreover, the recent influx of decoding strategies has further complicated this landscape. This paper provides a comprehensive and multifaceted analysis of various decoding methods within the context of LLMs, evaluating their performance, robustness to hyperparameter changes, and decoding speeds across a wide range of tasks, models, and deployment environments. Our findings reveal that decoding method performance is notably task-dependent and influenced by factors such as alignment, model size, and quantization. Intriguingly, sensitivity analysis exposes that certain methods achieve superior performance at the cost of extensive hyperparameter tuning, highlighting the trade-off between attaining optimal results and the practicality of implementation in varying contexts.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This paper examines different decoding methods used in large language models (LLMs) to generate human-like text.
- It compares deterministic and stochastic decoding approaches, exploring their strengths, weaknesses, and applications.
- The paper aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of decoding methods in the era of rapidly advancing LLMs.
Plain English Explanation
Large language models (LLMs) like GPT-3 and DALL-E have made remarkable progress in generating human-like text and images. However, the way these models produce their outputs, known as "decoding," is a complex and often misunderstood process.
This paper takes a deep dive into the various decoding methods used in LLMs. Decoding refers to the algorithms and techniques used to convert the model's internal representations into the final text or images that we see.
The paper explores two main types of decoding methods: deterministic methods and stochastic methods. Deterministic methods, like beam search, always produce the same output given the same input. Stochastic methods, like sampling, introduce randomness to generate more diverse outputs.
Each approach has its own advantages and disadvantages. Deterministic methods tend to be more reliable and consistent, but they can be limited in their creative potential. Stochastic methods, on the other hand, can produce more varied and imaginative outputs, but they can also be less predictable.
The paper also discusses how the choice of decoding method can impact the quality, coherence, and diversity of the generated text. For example, using large language models for machine translation may require different decoding strategies than using them for open-ended text generation.
Overall, this paper provides a comprehensive overview of the decoding landscape in the era of LLMs, helping researchers and practitioners understand the nuances and trade-offs of different decoding approaches.
Technical Explanation
The paper begins by introducing the concept of decoding in the context of large language models (LLMs). Decoding refers to the process of converting the model's internal representations into the final text or images that are presented to the user.
The authors then dive into a detailed exploration of two broad categories of decoding methods: deterministic and stochastic.
Deterministic methods, such as beam search, always produce the same output given the same input. These methods aim to find the most likely sequence of tokens that maximizes a specific objective, such as the model's estimated probability of the output.
In contrast, stochastic methods, like sampling, introduce randomness into the decoding process to generate more diverse outputs. These methods explore the model's probability distribution to generate a variety of plausible outputs, rather than focusing on the single most likely sequence.
The paper then delves into the trade-offs and applications of these different decoding approaches. Deterministic methods are generally more reliable and consistent, but they may be limited in their creative potential. Stochastic methods can produce more varied and imaginative outputs, but they can also be less predictable.
The authors also discuss how the choice of decoding method can impact the quality, coherence, and diversity of the generated text, and how different applications, such as machine translation or open-ended text generation, may require different decoding strategies.
Throughout the paper, the authors provide a comprehensive survey of the latest research on decoding methods, including discussions of more advanced techniques and their potential applications.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a thorough and well-researched overview of decoding methods in the era of large language models. The authors have done an excellent job of highlighting the key differences between deterministic and stochastic approaches, as well as their respective strengths and weaknesses.
One potential area for further research mentioned in the paper is the development of hybrid decoding methods that combine the benefits of both deterministic and stochastic approaches. Additionally, the authors note that the choice of decoding method can have significant implications for the quality, coherence, and diversity of the generated text, and that more work is needed to understand these trade-offs in different application domains.
While the paper covers a broad range of decoding methods and their applications, it would have been helpful to see more discussion of potential limitations or areas for improvement. For example, the authors could have addressed concerns around the reliability and predictability of stochastic decoding methods, or the potential for bias and lack of control in highly creative text generation.
Overall, this paper provides a valuable contribution to the field of large language model research, offering researchers and practitioners a comprehensive understanding of the decoding landscape and its implications for various applications.
Conclusion
This paper provides a thorough examination of decoding methods in the era of large language models (LLMs). It explores the key differences between deterministic and stochastic approaches, highlighting their respective strengths, weaknesses, and applications.
The paper's comprehensive coverage of the latest research on decoding methods, including discussions of more advanced techniques and their potential use cases, makes it a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners working in the field of natural language processing and generation.
By delving into the trade-offs and implications of different decoding strategies, the paper helps to shed light on the complex and often misunderstood process of generating human-like text using LLMs. This understanding can inform the development of more effective and efficient language models, ultimately leading to improved applications in areas like machine translation, dialogue systems, and creative writing.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
💬
Unlocking Efficiency in Large Language Model Inference: A Comprehensive Survey of Speculative Decoding
Heming Xia, Zhe Yang, Qingxiu Dong, Peiyi Wang, Yongqi Li, Tao Ge, Tianyu Liu, Wenjie Li, Zhifang Sui
0
0
To mitigate the high inference latency stemming from autoregressive decoding in Large Language Models (LLMs), Speculative Decoding has emerged as a novel decoding paradigm for LLM inference. In each decoding step, this method first drafts several future tokens efficiently and then verifies them in parallel. Unlike autoregressive decoding, Speculative Decoding facilitates the simultaneous decoding of multiple tokens per step, thereby accelerating inference. This paper presents a comprehensive overview and analysis of this promising decoding paradigm. We begin by providing a formal definition and formulation of Speculative Decoding. Then, we organize in-depth discussions on its key facets, such as drafter selection and verification strategies. Furthermore, we present a comparative analysis of leading methods under third-party testing environments. We aim for this work to serve as a catalyst for further research on Speculative Decoding, ultimately contributing to more efficient LLM inference.
6/5/2024
Decoding Matters: Addressing Amplification Bias and Homogeneity Issue for LLM-based Recommendation
Keqin Bao, Jizhi Zhang, Yang Zhang, Xinyue Huo, Chong Chen, Fuli Feng
0
0
Adapting Large Language Models (LLMs) for recommendation requires careful consideration of the decoding process, given the inherent differences between generating items and natural language. Existing approaches often directly apply LLMs' original decoding methods. However, we find these methods encounter significant challenges: 1) amplification bias -- where standard length normalization inflates scores for items containing tokens with generation probabilities close to 1 (termed ghost tokens), and 2) homogeneity issue -- generating multiple similar or repetitive items for a user. To tackle these challenges, we introduce a new decoding approach named Debiasing-Diversifying Decoding (D3). D3 disables length normalization for ghost tokens to alleviate amplification bias, and it incorporates a text-free assistant model to encourage tokens less frequently generated by LLMs for counteracting recommendation homogeneity. Extensive experiments on real-world datasets demonstrate the method's effectiveness in enhancing accuracy and diversity.
6/24/2024
💬
Improving Machine Translation with Large Language Models: A Preliminary Study with Cooperative Decoding
Jiali Zeng, Fandong Meng, Yongjing Yin, Jie Zhou
0
0
Contemporary translation engines based on the encoder-decoder framework have made significant strides in development. However, the emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has disrupted their position by presenting the potential for achieving superior translation quality. To uncover the circumstances in which LLMs excel and explore how their strengths can be harnessed to enhance translation quality, we first conduct a comprehensive analysis to assess the strengths and limitations of various commercial NMT systems and MT-oriented LLMs. Our findings indicate that neither NMT nor MT-oriented LLMs alone can effectively address all the translation issues, but MT-oriented LLMs show promise as a complementary solution to NMT systems. Building upon these insights, we propose Cooperative Decoding (CoDec), which treats NMT systems as a pretranslation model and MT-oriented LLMs as a supplemental solution to handle complex scenarios beyond the capability of NMT alone. Experimental results on the WMT22 test sets and a newly collected test set WebCrawl demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of CoDec, highlighting its potential as a robust solution for combining NMT systems with MT-oriented LLMs in the field of machine translation.
5/28/2024
💬
Language Model Decoding as Direct Metrics Optimization
Haozhe Ji, Pei Ke, Hongning Wang, Minlie Huang
0
0
Despite the remarkable advances in language modeling, current mainstream decoding methods still struggle to generate texts that align with human texts across different aspects. In particular, sampling-based methods produce less-repetitive texts which are often disjunctive in discourse, while search-based methods maintain topic coherence at the cost of increased repetition. Overall, these methods fall short in achieving holistic alignment across a broad range of aspects. In this work, we frame decoding from a language model as an optimization problem with the goal of strictly matching the expected performance with human texts measured by multiple metrics of desired aspects simultaneously. The resulting decoding distribution enjoys an analytical solution that scales the input language model distribution via a sequence-level energy function defined by these metrics. And most importantly, we prove that this induced distribution is guaranteed to improve the perplexity on human texts, which suggests a better approximation to the underlying distribution of human texts. To facilitate tractable sampling from this globally normalized distribution, we adopt the Sampling-Importance-Resampling technique. Experiments on various domains and model scales demonstrate the superiority of our method in metrics alignment with human texts and human evaluation over strong baselines.
6/6/2024