arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2407.21787cs.LGcs.AI
收藏

大型语言猴子:通过重复采样扩展推理计算

Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Sampling

Stanford University(斯坦福大学);University of Oxford(牛津大学);Google DeepMind(谷歌DeepMind)

Bradley Brown, Jordan Juravsky, Ryan Ehrlich, Ronald Clark, Quoc V. Le, Christopher Ré, Azalia Mirhoseini

AI总结:

本文提出通过重复采样扩展推理计算,发现覆盖率随样本数呈指数幂律增长,在可自动验证任务中显著提升性能,并揭示了多数投票等方法在无验证器场景下的扩展局限。

摘要:

扩展用于训练语言模型的计算量已显著提升了它们的能力。然而,在推理方面,我们通常限制模型对一个问题只进行一次尝试。在此,我们探索将推理计算作为另一个扩展维度,采用从模型中重复采样候选解的简单技术。在多个任务和模型上,我们观察到覆盖率——即由任意生成样本解决的问题所占比例——随着样本数量在四个数量级范围内扩展。有趣的是,覆盖率与样本数量之间的关系通常是对数线性的,并且可以用指数幂律建模,这表明存在推理时扩展定律。在编码和形式证明等领域,答案可以被自动验证,这些覆盖率的提升直接转化为性能的改进。当我们将重复采样应用于SWE-bench Lite时,使用DeepSeek-Coder-V2-Instruct解决的问题比例从单次采样的15.9%提高到250次采样的56%,超过了单样本的最先进水平43%。在没有自动验证器的领域,我们发现从样本集合中挑选答案的常用方法(多数投票和奖励模型)在几百个样本之后趋于饱和,无法完全随样本预算扩展。

英文摘要:

Scaling the amount of compute used to train language models has dramatically improved their capabilities. However, when it comes to inference, we often limit models to making only one attempt at a problem. Here, we explore inference compute as another axis for scaling, using the simple technique of repeatedly sampling candidate solutions from a model. Across multiple tasks and models, we observe that coverage -- the fraction of problems that are solved by any generated sample -- scales with the number of samples over four orders of magnitude. Interestingly, the relationship between coverage and the number of samples is often log-linear and can be modelled with an exponentiated power law, suggesting the existence of inference-time scaling laws. In domains like coding and formal proofs, where answers can be automatically verified, these increases in coverage directly translate into improved performance. When we apply repeated sampling to SWE-bench Lite, the fraction of issues solved with DeepSeek-Coder-V2-Instruct increases from 15.9% with one sample to 56% with 250 samples, outperforming the single-sample state-of-the-art of 43%. In domains without automatic verifiers, we find that common methods for picking from a sample collection (majority voting and reward models) plateau beyond several hundred samples and fail to fully scale with the sample budget.

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。

↑