Fei Tang

Andreas Fürst, Elisabeth Rumetshofer, Johannes Lehner et al.

CLIP yielded impressive results on zero-shot transfer learning tasks and is considered as a foundation model like BERT or GPT3. CLIP vision models that have a rich representation are pre-trained using the InfoNCE objective and natural language supervision before they are fine-tuned on particular tasks. Though CLIP excels at zero-shot transfer learning, it suffers from an explaining away problem, that is, it focuses on one or few features, while neglecting other relevant features. This problem is caused by insufficiently extracting the covariance structure in the original multi-modal data. We suggest to use modern Hopfield networks to tackle the problem of explaining away. Their retrieved embeddings have an enriched covariance structure derived from co-occurrences of features in the stored embeddings. However, modern Hopfield networks increase the saturation effect of the InfoNCE objective which hampers learning. We propose to use the InfoLOOB objective to mitigate this saturation effect. We introduce the novel "Contrastive Leave One Out Boost" (CLOOB), which uses modern Hopfield networks for covariance enrichment together with the InfoLOOB objective. In experiments we compare CLOOB to CLIP after pre-training on the Conceptual Captions and the YFCC dataset with respect to their zero-shot transfer learning performance on other datasets. CLOOB consistently outperforms CLIP at zero-shot transfer learning across all considered architectures and datasets.

Fei Tang, Michael Kopp

In their recent paper titled "Large Associative Memory Problem in Neurobiology and Machine Learning" [arXiv:2008.06996] the authors gave a biologically plausible microscopic theory from which one can recover many dense associative memory models discussed in the literature. We show that the layers of the recent "MLP-mixer" [arXiv:2105.01601] as well as the essentially equivalent model in [arXiv:2105.02723] are amongst them.

Wanling Gao, Fei Tang, Jianfeng Zhan et al.

Modern real-world application scenarios like Internet services consist of a diversity of AI and non-AI modules with huge code sizes and long and complicated execution paths, which raises serious benchmarking or evaluating challenges. Using AI components or micro benchmarks alone can lead to error-prone conclusions. This paper presents a methodology to attack the above challenge. We formalize a real-world application scenario as a Directed Acyclic Graph-based model and propose the rules to distill it into a permutation of essential AI and non-AI tasks, which we call a scenario benchmark. Together with seventeen industry partners, we extract nine typical scenario benchmarks. We design and implement an extensible, configurable, and flexible benchmark framework. We implement two Internet service AI scenario benchmarks based on the framework as proxies to two real-world application scenarios. We consider scenario, component, and micro benchmarks as three indispensable parts for evaluating. Our evaluation shows the advantage of our methodology against using component or micro AI benchmarks alone. The specifications, source code, testbed, and results are publicly available from \url{https://www.benchcouncil.org/aibench/scenario/}.

Fei Tang, Wanling Gao, Jianfeng Zhan et al.

Earlier-stage evaluations of a new AI architecture/system need affordable benchmarks. Only using a few AI component benchmarks like MLPerfalone in the other stages may lead to misleading conclusions. Moreover, the learning dynamics are not well understood, and the benchmarks' shelf-life is short. This paper proposes a balanced benchmarking methodology. We use real-world benchmarks to cover the factors space that impacts the learning dynamics to the most considerable extent. After performing an exhaustive survey on Internet service AI domains, we identify and implement nineteen representative AI tasks with state-of-the-art models. For repeatable performance ranking (RPR subset) and workload characterization (WC subset), we keep two subsets to a minimum for affordability. We contribute by far the most comprehensive AI training benchmark suite. The evaluations show: (1) AIBench Training (v1.1) outperforms MLPerfTraining (v0.7) in terms of diversity and representativeness of model complexity, computational cost, convergent rate, computation, and memory access patterns, and hotspot functions; (2) Against the AIBench full benchmarks, its RPR subset shortens the benchmarking cost by 64%, while maintaining the primary workload characteristics; (3) The performance ranking shows the single-purpose AI accelerator like TPU with the optimized TensorFlowframework performs better than that of GPUs while losing the latter's general support for various AI models. The specification, source code, and performance numbers are available from the AIBench homepage https://www.benchcouncil.org/aibench-training/index.html.

Wanling Gao, Fei Tang, Jianfeng Zhan et al.

Domain-specific software and hardware co-design is encouraging as it is much easier to achieve efficiency for fewer tasks. Agile domain-specific benchmarking speeds up the process as it provides not only relevant design inputs but also relevant metrics, and tools. Unfortunately, modern workloads like Big data, AI, and Internet services dwarf the traditional one in terms of code size, deployment scale, and execution path, and hence raise serious benchmarking challenges. This paper proposes an agile domain-specific benchmarking methodology. Together with seventeen industry partners, we identify ten important end-to-end application scenarios, among which sixteen representative AI tasks are distilled as the AI component benchmarks. We propose the permutations of essential AI and non-AI component benchmarks as end-to-end benchmarks. An end-to-end benchmark is a distillation of the essential attributes of an industry-scale application. We design and implement a highly extensible, configurable, and flexible benchmark framework, on the basis of which, we propose the guideline for building end-to-end benchmarks, and present the first end-to-end Internet service AI benchmark. The preliminary evaluation shows the value of our benchmark suite---AIBench against MLPerf and TailBench for hardware and software designers, micro-architectural researchers, and code developers. The specifications, source code, testbed, and results are publicly available from the web site \url{http://www.benchcouncil.org/AIBench/index.html}.

Wanling Gao, Fei Tang, Lei Wang et al.

Today's Internet Services are undergoing fundamental changes and shifting to an intelligent computing era where AI is widely employed to augment services. In this context, many innovative AI algorithms, systems, and architectures are proposed, and thus the importance of benchmarking and evaluating them rises. However, modern Internet services adopt a microservice-based architecture and consist of various modules. The diversity of these modules and complexity of execution paths, the massive scale and complex hierarchy of datacenter infrastructure, the confidential issues of data sets and workloads pose great challenges to benchmarking. In this paper, we present the first industry-standard Internet service AI benchmark suite---AIBench with seventeen industry partners, including several top Internet service providers. AIBench provides a highly extensible, configurable, and flexible benchmark framework that contains loosely coupled modules. We identify sixteen prominent AI problem domains like learning to rank, each of which forms an AI component benchmark, from three most important Internet service domains: search engine, social network, and e-commerce, which is by far the most comprehensive AI benchmarking effort. On the basis of the AIBench framework, abstracting the real-world data sets and workloads from one of the top e-commerce providers, we design and implement the first end-to-end Internet service AI benchmark, which contains the primary modules in the critical paths of an industry scale application and is scalable to deploy on different cluster scales. The specifications, source code, and performance numbers are publicly available from the benchmark council web site http://www.benchcouncil.org/AIBench/index.html.