or would this be that much better when using a fine-turned version of the 65B parameter Llama model.
or would this be that much better when using a fine-turned version of the 65B parameter Llama model.
The fact that the big players aren't doing this doesn't surprise me --- the more parameters, the less they have to worry about small-time competititors. I wouldn't be surprised if you could make an order of magnitude reduction in parameters and get the same results, and they're all just terrified we'll figure that out
As an undergrad I did some research on mapping "computational complexity" concepts onto neural networks to answer questions like what classes of problems require what minimum hidden layer sizes or network topologies using strategies similar to this. I was actually astounded how simple some of the resulting networks were that could nonetheless solve complex tasks like OCR with very few weights.
https://blog.dataiku.com/making-neural-networks-smaller-for-... https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.00774 https://tivadardanka.com/blog/how-to-compress-a-neural-netwo...
There's also quantization. It's currently where a lot of the current grassroots research is happening, if you've seen the llama.cpp repo posted here on HN, it uses the original 16-bit float weights downsized to 4-bit integers with a comparable reduction in resource usage with relatively little performance loss.
The big players are also using quantization in hardware, most notably with Google's TPUs.