← Back to context

Comment by wildermuthn

4 days ago

Great research here. Contextual real-time weight modification is definitely one of the breakthroughs required for AGI. Why create a LoRA when you can generate one on the fly suited to the task at hand?

It does not seem like they are doing inference time weight changes, to the tune of running backprop. It sounds more like they are applying a pre-trained vector to the model, and select that vector based on the input, in a two step process

  • That’s my general understanding as well, but it isn’t a large conceptual leap to go from real-time selection of pretrained “z-vectors” to real-time generation of the same. The larger conceptual breakthrough, with demonstration of its effectiveness, is the big success here.

    • While not a large conceptual leap, the real-time generation of "z-vectors" is not cheap in terms of compute or data requirements, the latter of which I see as the main issue. How are you going to generate the vector from a single real-time input?

      I still have yet to see anything that dissuades me from agreeing with Yann LeCun when he says Transformers are fundamentally limited. We won't get creativity, reasoning, or even move past hallucinations without a major breakthrough

      3 replies →

    • The interesting thing here is that the human brain also seems to use pretrained ... things. For vision, use the visual subsystem. For hearing, use the auditory subsystem. For movement ... you get the point. Plus you can combine these pretrained ... things, so for example for complex movement, like balancing on a tightrope, multiple subsystems are used (try standing on one leg with your eyes closed).

      Z-vectors are of course nothing like the subsystems in your brain, but general the approach is certainly similar to how the brain works.

      3 replies →

  • Sort of. According to the text they can use multiple z-vectors (sets of weights that select for parts of the system to be used to answer a specific question) simultaneously, using a "simple optimization algorithm" to determine the relative weight for each of these vectors.

Why not, as each new task comes up, and then weights are revalued, save those weights and keep them for reference as priors for similar future tasks? As the model is exposed to new data the average of the set of priors of things the model thinks is similar might move closer to the posterior making the model quicker and more able to arrive at good outcomes. I suppose storage might be an issue.

  • I'm wondering if you could fine tune the model on an aggregate of a temporal slice of revalued weights? Something analogous to REM sleep's involvement in embedding the days events into long term memory.

    • Sieve the temporary backprop interim weights as a function of its loss of varentrophy relative to its place in the revalued weights.

      Remove the bottom weights dynamically based on the local gradient in varentrophy so that internal dissonance ("doubt") can be selected against.

      "Preference Optimization" but with more opportunities for meta-optimization.