arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2407.12514

On Initializing Transformers with Pre-trained Embeddings

Abstract

It has become common practice now to use random initialization schemes, rather than the pre-trained embeddings, when training transformer based models from scratch. Indeed, we find that pre-trained word embeddings from GloVe, and some sub-word embeddings extracted from language models such as T5 and mT5 fare much worse compared to random initialization. This is counter-intuitive given the well-known representational and transfer-learning advantages of pre-training. Interestingly, we also find that BERT and mBERT embeddings fare better than random initialization, showing the advantages of pre-trained representations. In this work, we posit two potential factors that contribute to these mixed results: the model sensitivity to parameter distribution and the embedding interactions with position encodings. We observe that pre-trained GloVe, T5, and mT5 embeddings have a wider distribution of values. As argued in the initialization studies, such large value initializations can lead to poor training because of saturated outputs. Further, the larger embedding values can, in effect, absorb the smaller position encoding values when added together, thus losing position information. Standardizing the pre-trained embeddings to a narrow range (e.g. as prescribed by Xavier) leads to substantial gains for Glove, T5, and mT5 embeddings. On the other hand, BERT pre-trained embeddings, while larger, are still relatively closer to Xavier initialization range which may allow it to effectively transfer the pre-trained knowledge.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ha Young Kim, Niranjan Balasubramanian, Byungkon Kang. 2024-07-17. On Initializing Transformers with Pre-trained Embeddings. https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.12514

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Universal Topological Regularity of Syntactic Structures

Despite their widespread use, the principles governing the organisation of syntactic dependency trees remain poorly understood. I analyse dependency trees from 124 typologically, genetically, and geographically diverse languages. Their topology departs systematically from randomness. Relative to uniformly sampled random trees, dependency trees exhibit greater structural robustness and lower branching heterogeneity. I propose that these universal regularities emerge naturally from incremental grammatical encoding. I model this process using sublinear preferential attachment. The model accurately reproduces the observed topology. More generally, the results demonstrate how a universal statistical property of syntax can emerge from a simple, cognitively motivated generative process. They further illustrate a broader principle of efficiency by construction: communicatively efficient syntactic structures can emerge without direct optimisation for communication.

cs.CL

An Incomplete Loop: Deductive, Inductive, and Abductive Reasoning in Language Models

Modern language models (LMs) can learn to perform new tasks in different ways: in instruction following, the target task is described explicitly in natural language; in few-shot prompting, the task is specified implicitly with a small number of examples; in instruction inference, LMs are presented with in-context examples and are then prompted to generate a natural language task description before making predictions. Each of these procedures may be thought of as invoking a different form of reasoning: instruction following involves deductive reasoning, few-shot prompting involves inductive reasoning, and instruction inference involves abductive reasoning. How do these different capabilities relate? Across four LMs (from the gpt and llama families) and two learning problems (involving arithmetic functions and machine translation) we find a strong dissociation between the different types of reasoning: LMs can sometimes learn effectively from few-shot prompts even when they are unable to explain their own prediction rules; conversely, they sometimes infer useful task descriptions while completely failing to learn from human-generated descriptions of the same task. Our results highlight the non-systematic nature of reasoning even in some of today's largest LMs, and underscore the fact that very different learning mechanisms may be invoked by seemingly similar prompting procedures.

cs.CL

Thinking beyond the anthropomorphic paradigm benefits LLM research

Anthropomorphism, or the attribution of human traits to technology, is an automatic and unconscious response that occurs even in those with advanced technical expertise. In this position paper, we analyze hundreds of thousands of research articles to present empirical evidence of the prevalence and growth of anthropomorphic terminology in research on large language models (LLMs). We argue for challenging the deeper assumptions reflected in this terminology -- which, though often useful, may inadvertently constrain LLM development -- and broadening beyond them to open new pathways for understanding and improving LLMs. Specifically, we identify and examine five anthropomorphic assumptions that shape research across the LLM development lifecycle. For each assumption (e.g., that LLMs must use natural language for reasoning, or that they should be evaluated on benchmarks originally meant for humans), we demonstrate empirical, non-anthropomorphic alternatives that remain under-explored yet offer promising directions for LLM research and development.

cs.CL