UMPIPE: Unequal Microbatches-Based Pipeline Parallelism for Deep Neural Network Training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing need for large-scale deep neural networks (DNN) has made parallel training an area of intensive focus. One effective method, microbatch-based pipeline parallelism (notably GPipe), accelerates parallel training in various architectures. However, existing parallel training architectures normally use equal data partitioning (EDP), where each layer's process maintains identical microbatch-sizes. EDP may hinder training speed because different processes often require varying optimal microbatch-sizes. To address this, we introduce UMPIPE, a novel framework for unequal microbatches-based pipeline parallelism. UMPIPE enables unequal data partitions (UEDP) across processes to optimize resource utilization. We develop a recurrence formula to calculate the time cost in UMPIPE by considering both computation and communication processes. To further enhance UMPIPE's efficiency, we propose the Dual-Chromosome Genetic Algorithm for UMPIPE (DGAP) that accounts for the independent time costs of forward and backward propagation. Furthermore, we present TiDGAP, a two-level improvement on DGAP. TiDGAP accelerates the process by simultaneously calculating the end time for multiple individuals and microbatches using matrix operations. Our extensive experiments validate the dual-chromosome strategy's optimization benefits and TiDGAP's acceleration capabilities. TiDGAP can achieve better training schemes than baselines, such as the local greedy algorithm and the global greedy-based dynamic programming. Compared to (GPipe, PipeDream), UMPIPE achieves increases in training speed:$(13.89,11.09)\%$for GPT1-14,$(17.11, 7.96)\%$for VGG16 and$\geq (170,100)\%$for simulation networks.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".