TroL: Traversal of Layers for Large Language and Vision Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large language and vision models (LLVMs) have been driven by the generalization power of large language models (LLMs) and the advent of visual instruction tuning.Along with scaling them up directly, these models enable LLVMs to showcase powerful vision language (VL) performances by covering diverse tasks via natural language instructions.However, existing open-source LLVMs that perform comparably to closed-source LLVMs such as GPT-4V are often considered too large (e.g., 26B, 34B, and 110B parameters), having a larger number of layers.These large models demand costly, high-end resources for both training and inference.To address this issue, we present a new efficient LLVM family with 1.8B, 3.8B, and 7B LLM model sizes, Traversal of Layers ( TroL), which enables the reuse of layers in a token-wise manner.This layer traversing technique simulates the effect of looking back and retracing the answering stream while increasing the number of forward propagation layers without physically adding more layers.We demonstrate that TroL employs a simple layer traversing approach yet efficiently outperforms the open-source LLVMs with larger model sizes and rivals the performances of the closed-source LLVMs with substantial sizes.Code is available in https://github.com/ByungKwanLee/TroL.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".