Xinrong Zhang

Shengding Hu, Xin Liu, Xu Han et al. · tencent-ai, tsinghua

The scientific scale-up of large language models (LLMs) necessitates a comprehensive understanding of their scaling properties. However, the existing literature on the scaling properties only yields an incomplete answer: optimization loss decreases predictably as the model size increases, in line with established scaling law; yet no scaling law for task has been established and the task performances are far from predictable during scaling. Task performances typically show minor gains on small models until they improve dramatically once models exceed a size threshold, exemplifying the ``emergent abilities''. In this study, we discover that small models, although they exhibit minor performance, demonstrate critical and consistent task performance improvements that are not captured by conventional evaluation strategies due to insufficient measurement resolution. To measure such improvements, we introduce PassUntil, an evaluation strategy with theoretically infinite resolution, through massive sampling in the decoding phase. With PassUntil, we conduct a quantitative investigation into the scaling law of task performance. The investigation contains two parts. Firstly, a strict task scaling law that is not conventionally known to exist, is identified, enhancing the predictability of task performances. Remarkably, we are able to predict the performance of the 2.4B model on code generation with merely 0.05\% deviation before training starts, which is the first systematic attempt to verify predictable scaling proposed by GPT-4's report. Secondly, we are able to study emergent abilities quantitatively. We identify a kind of accelerated emergence whose scaling curve cannot be fitted by standard scaling law function and has a increasing speed. We then examine two hypothesis and imply that the ``multiple circuits hypothesis'' might be responsible for the accelerated emergence.

Xinrong Zhang, Yingfa Chen, Shengding Hu et al. · tsinghua

Processing and reasoning over long contexts is crucial for many practical applications of Large Language Models (LLMs), such as document comprehension and agent construction. Despite recent strides in making LLMs process contexts with more than 100K tokens, there is currently a lack of a standardized benchmark to evaluate this long-context capability. Existing public benchmarks typically focus on contexts around 10K tokens, limiting the assessment and comparison of LLMs in processing longer contexts. In this paper, we propose $\infty$Bench, the first LLM benchmark featuring an average data length surpassing 100K tokens. $\infty$Bench comprises synthetic and realistic tasks spanning diverse domains, presented in both English and Chinese. The tasks in $\infty$Bench are designed to require well understanding of long dependencies in contexts, and make simply retrieving a limited number of passages from contexts not sufficient for these tasks. In our experiments, based on $\infty$Bench, we evaluate the state-of-the-art proprietary and open-source LLMs tailored for processing long contexts. The results indicate that existing long context LLMs still require significant advancements to effectively process 100K+ context. We further present three intriguing analyses regarding the behavior of LLMs processing long context.

Xinrong Zhang, Zihou Ren, Xi Li et al.

The deluge of new papers has significantly blocked the development of academics, which is mainly caused by author-level and publication-level evaluation metrics that only focus on quantity. Those metrics have resulted in several severe problems that trouble scholars focusing on the important research direction for a long time and even promote an impetuous academic atmosphere. To solve those problems, we propose Phocus, a novel academic evaluation mechanism for authors and papers. Phocus analyzes the sentence containing a citation and its contexts to predict the sentiment towards the corresponding reference. Combining others factors, Phocus classifies citations coarsely, ranks all references within a paper, and utilizes the results of the classifier and the ranking model to get the local influential factor of a reference to the citing paper. The global influential factor of the reference to the citing paper is the product of the local influential factor and the total influential factor of the citing paper. Consequently, an author's academic influential factor is the sum of his contributions to each paper he co-authors.