Sorted LLaMA: Unlocking the Potential of Intermediate Layers of Large Language Models for Dynamic Inference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing (NLP) by excelling at understanding and generating human-like text. However, their widespread deployment can be prohibitively expensive. SortedNet is a recent training technique for enabling dynamic inference by leveraging the modularity in networks and sorting sub-models based on computation/accuracy in a nested manner. We extend SortedNet to generative NLP tasks, making large language models dynamic without any Pre-Training and by only replacing Standard Fine-Tuning (SFT) with Sorted Fine-Tuning (SoFT). Our approach boosts model efficiency, eliminating the need for multiple models for various scenarios during inference. We show that this approach can unlock the potential of intermediate layers of transformers in generating the target output. Our sub-models remain integral components of the original model, minimizing storage requirements and transition costs between different computational/latency budgets. The efficacy of our proposed method was demonstrated by applying it to tune LLaMA 2 13B on the Stanford Alpaca dataset for instruction following and TriviaQA for closed-book question answering. Our results show the superior performance of sub-models in comparison to Standard Fine-Tuning and SFT+ICT (Early-Exit), all achieved with very efficient tuning and without additional memory usage during inference.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".