paint-brush
Surveying the Evolution and Future Trajectory of Generative AI - Innovative Horizon of MOEby@disburse

Surveying the Evolution and Future Trajectory of Generative AI - Innovative Horizon of MOE

by DisburseOctober 27th, 2024
Read on Terminal Reader
tldt arrow

Too Long; Didn't Read

This paper surveys the evolution of generative AI, highlighting innovations in MoE, multimodality, and AGI while addressing ethical and research challenges.
featured image - Surveying the Evolution and Future Trajectory of Generative AI - Innovative Horizon of MOE
Disburse HackerNoon profile picture

Authors:

(1) Timothy R. McIntosh;

(2) Teo Susnjak;

(3) Tong Liu;

(4) Paul Watters;

(5) Malka N. Halgamuge.

Abstract and Introduction

Background: Evolution of Generative AI

The Current Generative AI Research Taxonomy

Innovative Horizon of MOE

Speculated Capabilities of Q*

Projected Capabilities of AGI

Impact Analysis on Generative AI Research Taxonomy

Emergent Research Priorities in Generative AI

Practical Implications and Limitations of Generative AI Technologies

Impact of Generative AI on Preprints Across Disciplines

Conclusions, Disclaimer, and References

IV. INNOVATIVE HORIZON OF MOE

The MoE model architecture represents a pioneering advancement in transformer-based language models, offering unparalleled scalability and efficiency (Fig. 4). As evidenced by recent models like the 1.6 trillion parameter Switch Transformer [285] and the 8x7B parameter Mixtra [286], MoEbased designs are rapidly redefining the frontiers of model scale and performance across diverse language tasks.


A. Core Concept and Structure


MoE models represent a significant innovation in neural network design, offering enhanced scalability and efficiency in training and inference [287], [288], [110]. At their core, MoE models utilize a sparsity-driven architecture by replacing dense layers with sparse MoE layers comprising multiple expert networks, where each expert is dedicated to a specific subset of the training data or task, and a trainable gating mechanism dynamically allocates input tokens to these experts, thereby optimizing computational resources and effectively adapting to the task’s complexity [94], [21], [110]. MoE models demonstrate a substantial advantage in terms of pretraining speed, outperforming dense models [94], [287]. However, they face challenges in fine-tuning and require substantial memory for inference due to the necessity of loading all experts into Video Random Access Memory (VRAM) [289], [290], [110]. The structure of MoE involves alternating transformer layers with router layers containing gating networks for expert routing, leading to an architecture that allows significant parameter scaling and advanced specialization in problem-solving [291], [21].


A distinguishing characteristic of MoE models is their flexibility in managing large datasets, capable of amplifying model capacity by over a thousand times while only experiencing minor reductions in computational efficiency [289], [292]. The Sparsely-Gated Mixture-of-Experts Layer, a key component of these models, comprises numerous simple feed-forward expert networks and a trainable gating network responsible for expert selection, which can facilitate the dynamic and sparse activation of experts for each input instance, maintaining high computational efficiency [293], [294], [110].


Recent advancements in MoE models, such as those in the Switch Transformer, have highlighted the significant benefits of intelligent routing, when the router’s ability to intelligently route tokens to appropriate experts confers considerable advantages to MoE models, allowing them to scale up model sizes while keeping compute time constant [295], [296], [297]. Experimental evidence suggests that routers learn to route inputs according to data clusters, demonstrating their potential in real-world applications [295], [289]. The core concept and structure of MoE models lie in their dynamic routing and specialization capabilities, offering promising avenues for scaling up neural networks and enhancing their efficiency and adaptability in various tasks, but the robustness of the router must be protected against adversarial attacks [289], [298].


B. Training and Inference Efficiency


MoE models, notably Mixtral 8x7B, are renowned for their superior pretraining speed compared to dense models, yet they face hurdles in fine-tuning and demand considerable VRAM for inference, owing to the requirement of loading all experts [289], [290], [110]. Recent advancements in MoE architecture have resulted in notable training cost efficiencies, especially in encoder-decoder models, with evidence showing cost savings of up to fivefold in certain contexts when compared to dense models [21], [289], [298], [287]. Innovations like DeepSpeedMoE [287] offered new architectural designs and model compression, decreasing the MoE model size by approximately 3.7x and optimizing inference to achieve up to 7.3x better latency and cost efficiency. The progression in distributed MoE training and inference, notably with innovations like Lina [299], has effectively tackled the all-to-all communication bottleneck by enhancing tensor partitioning, which not only improves all-to-all communication and training step time, but also optimizes resource scheduling during inference, leading to a substantial reduction in training step time by up to 1.73 times and lowering the 95th percentile inference time by an average of 1.63 times compared to existing systems. These developments have marked a crucial shift in the large model landscape, from dense to sparse MoE models, expanding the potential applications of AI by training higher-quality models with fewer resources.


C. Load Balancing and Router Optimization


Effective load balancing is essential in MoE models to guarantee a uniform distribution of computational load among experts, with the router network in MoE layers, responsible for selecting the appropriate experts for processing specific tokens, playing a pivotal role in achieving this balance, which is fundamental to the stability and overall performance of MoE models [293], [289], [288], [300], [110]. Developments in router Zloss regularization techniques plays a crucial role in addressing expert imbalance in MoE models by fine-tuning the gating mechanism, ensuring a more equitable workload distribution across experts and fostering a stable training environment, thereby enhancing model performance and reducing training time and computational overhead [301], [302]. Concurrently, the integration of expert capacity management strategies, emerges as a crucial approach in MoE models to regulate the processing abilities of individual experts by setting thresholds on the number of tokens each can handle, effectively averting bottlenecks and ensuring a more efficient and streamlined model operation, leading to improved training processes and heightened performance during complex computational tasks [293], [303], [289].


D. Parallelism and Serving Techniques


Recent developments in MoE models highlighted their efficiency in parallelism and serving techniques, significantly influencing large-scale neural networks. DeepSpeed-MoE, for instance, introduces advanced parallelism modes like data parallelism, tensor-slicing for non-expert parameters, and expert parallelism for expert parameters, enhancing model efficiency, as their approach optimizes both latency and throughput in MoE model inference, offering scalable solutions in production environments using multiple Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) devices [287]. MoE models, versatile in applications like multilingual tasks and coding, demonstrated impressive capabilities in handling complex tasks due to their ensemblelike structure within a single framework [304], [305], [306]. Notably, models like Mixtral and Switch Transformer, with over 1.6 trillion parameters, achieved computational efficiency equivalent to a 10 billion-parameter dense model, because they benefited from the sublinear scaling of MoE compute versus model size, leading to substantial accuracy gains within fixed compute budgets [21], [289], [287], [110]. Moreover, DeepSpeed-MoE included model compression techniques, reducing model size by up to 3.7x while maintaining accuracy, and an end-to-end MoE training and inference solution, part of the DeepSpeed library, which was instrumental in serving large-scale MoE models with enhanced speed and costefficiency [287]. These innovations open new directions in AI, shifting from dense to sparse MoE models, where training and deploying higher-quality models with fewer resources become more widely achievable.


E. Future Directions and Applications


Emerging research on MoE architectures could focus on advancing sparse fine-tuning techniques, exploring instruction tuning methods, and improving routing algorithms to fully utilize performance and efficiency gains. As models scale over one billion parameters, MoE represents a paradigm shift for vastly expanding capabilities across scientific, medical, creative, and real-world applications. Frontier work could also aim to refine auto-tuning of hyperparameters during finetuning to optimize accuracy, calibration, and safety. MoE research continues to push model scale limits while maintaining specialization for transfer learning. Adaptive sparse access allows coordinating thousands of experts to cooperate on tasks ranging from reasoning to open domain dialogue. Continued analysis of routing mechanisms seeks to balance load across experts and minimize redundant computation. As the AI community further investigates MoE methods at scale, these models hold promise for new breakthroughs in language, code generation, reasoning, and multimodal applications. There is great interest in evaluating implications across education, healthcare, financial analysis, and other fields. Outcomes may yield insights not only into model optimization but also for understanding principles behind combinatorial generalization.


Figure 5: Conceptual Diagram of Speculated Q* Capabilities


This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 DEED license.