arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2407.04528cs.CLcs.AIcs.IRcs.LG

GPT 与 RETRO:探索检索与参数高效微调的交叉点

GPT vs RETRO: Exploring the Intersection of Retrieval and Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning

NVIDIA(英伟达)

Aleksander Ficek, Jiaqi Zeng, Oleksii Kuchaiev

AI总结:

本文在 8.23 亿至 480 亿参数的 GPT 与 RETRO 上比较 P-tuning、Adapters 和 LoRA,揭示检索模型零样本优势及 PEFT 适配差异。

摘要:

参数高效微调(PEFT)和检索增强生成(RAG)已成为在最小化计算需求的同时适配大型语言模型的流行方法。本文将 PEFT 方法(P-tuning、Adapters 和 LoRA)应用于改进的检索增强 Transformer(RETRO)以及基线 GPT 模型,涵盖从 8.23 亿到 480 亿参数的多种规模。结果表明,由于独特的预训练过程,RETRO 模型在零样本设置下优于 GPT 模型,但 GPT 模型在使用 PEFT 时具有更高的性能潜力。此外,研究表明 8B 参数模型在成本与性能之间达到最佳平衡,而 P-tuning 落后于其他 PEFT 技术。本文还进一步比较分析了将 PEFT 应用于指令微调 RETRO 模型与基础 RETRO 模型的差异。本工作首次全面比较了集成 RAG 的多种 PEFT 方法在 GPT 和 RETRO 模型上的应用,并突出了它们的相对性能。

英文摘要:

Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT) and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) have become popular methods for adapting large language models while minimizing compute requirements. In this paper, we apply PEFT methods (P-tuning, Adapters, and LoRA) to a modified Retrieval-Enhanced Transformer (RETRO) and a baseline GPT model across several sizes, ranging from 823 million to 48 billion parameters. We show that RETRO models outperform GPT models in zero-shot settings due to their unique pre-training process but GPT models have higher performance potential with PEFT. Additionally, our study indicates that 8B parameter models strike an optimal balance between cost and performance and P-tuning lags behind other PEFT techniques. We further provide a comparative analysis between applying PEFT to an Instruction-tuned RETRO model and base RETRO model. This work presents the first comprehensive comparison of various PEFT methods integrated with RAG, applied to both GPT and RETRO models, highlighting their relative performance.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑