Evidence receipt / belief
Published · transcript-backedAlessio Fanelli: belief
19 Jul 2023 Latent Space Llama 2: The New Open LLM SOTA (ft. Nathan Lambert, Matt Bornstein, Anton Troynikov, Russell Kaplan, Whole Mars Catalog et al.)
“I think to a lot of the AI engineers audience that we have, they're not as deep into the details of the papers.”
Source trail
Everything needed to verify it.
- Speaker
- Alessio Fanelli
- Attribution
- Verified speaker
- Claim type
- belief
- Recorded
- 19 Jul 2023
- Publisher
- Latent Space
Transcript context
…I've been a researcher and helping lead reinforcement learning from human feedback efforts at Hugging and face, which really means I do some research and I try to figure out how to fine tune models to do what people want. Generally we're trying to operate in the scale a little bit smaller than what Meta is doing cuz we obviously don't have that kind of resources at a startup. So I do a lot of technical research and also try to actually engage and communicate that with the community and specifically, Llama, I think I was most interested on kind of the research side. I think the paper is a phenomenal artifact and it's clear that the model is really strong in a lot of areas. And then kind of the big picture trends of where open source is going. Like this is a clear step in a direction that a lot of people wanted, but weren't sure if it was gonna happen. Yep. What are some of the things that stood out to you? I think to a lot of the AI engineers audience that we have, they're not as deep into the details of the papers. We'd love to get a, a read from somebody like you who's a much deeper at a, you know, model research level. Yeah. It's like, where do I start? So I think as a general summary, the paper includes a lot of details on methodology. So like, what are the things that they did in their stack to build, to actually run this? And it misses a lot of details on. What does a specific data set actually look like? It's clear that they have a really fine-tuned data set and they paid a lot of money for these data sets. I think may like, it seems like now that both surge and scale are claiming some part in it, which I find hilarious. Cause it's really unclear, which are two of the probably biggest data labeling firms. So they kind of took the approach, meta took the approach of starting with open source preference data and then added a lot onto it. And the most interesting part to me on this preference data, which is a new technical approach, is they trained two preference models, two reward models, one toward making the model helpful and one for making the model safe. And then in terms of open source models, it's clearly more performant on kind of ground root benchmarks and then it's safer.…
Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.