arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Tianmiao

Publications and source records attributed to Tianmiao.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Sensitivity Inflation from Cross-Record Precision Routing in Private Quantized Fine-Tuning

Private fine-tuning of large language models increasingly pairs DP-SGD with low-rank adapters on frozen, quantized backbones, and every such stack inherits one unstated premise: frozen layers keep each record's clipped gradient a function of that record alone. We show that LLM.int8 breaks this premise. It routes outlier activation columns to a higher-precision path using a union over the whole batch, so one record decides how every other record's activations are computed, even though the weights are frozen and the quantization scales are per row. We bound the resulting sensitivity inflation, state a record-isolation contract that restores the standard bound, and define record-owned precision dispatch that meets it with the same GEMMs as batched LLM.int8, so isolation needs no extra arithmetic. We then audit the native CUDA stack (bitsandbytes, PEFT, Opacus) against four matched controls. A constructed LoRA-Opacus witness reaches $15.0\times$ the add/remove bound. On pretrained OPT-125M with natural text, other records alter 20% of record-layer precision splits at batch size 16. An exploratory re-clipping analysis finds 10 of 64 candidate neighbors above the bound once every gradient is clipped; the top pair, revalidated natively, reaches $1.065C$ while every control stays within $C$, and forcing one layer's outlier mask removes the excess. A two-million-draw audit of the released adapters yields $\varepsilon$ lower bounds ($3.25$ at $δ=10^{-5}$) below the advertised guarantee ($4.38$). Resolving an excess this small at the release level would take about 200 times more draws, whereas checking the sensitivity contract directly exposes it in a few native runs, which makes contract checking the practical audit for private quantized training.

cs.LG↗

Guarded Compression of Adam Optimizer State with Shared-Gradient Bounds

Adam keeps two FP32 moments per parameter, twice the bytes of the FP32 weights, yet compressing them is risky: the update divides by the square root of the second moment, so small reconstruction errors can change the restored computation substantially. We study guarded moment compression, in which a coordinate's decoded moments are accepted only if they reproduce the native FP32 Adam update to within a tolerance $τ$, in units of the learning rate, for every gradient in a clipped domain; all other coordinates are stored exactly. The natural certificate, which ranges each update separately over gradient intervals, fails: on one million trained OPT-125M coordinates it escapes 98.9% of coordinates and the payload grows to 126.6% of raw FP32. Our key observation is that both updates consume the same gradient and parameter. Bounding their difference directly, with FP32 rounding-error allowances and a fixed mixed linear-logarithmic gradient partition, cuts escapes to 0.53% and the payload to 28.3% at $τ=0.01$. Across 120 complete-checkpoint restores of OPT-125M and ResNet-18, with four trained seeds and three training fractions per model, guarded 8-bit log codes shrink moment payloads by 69.5% and 71.9% relative to FP32, 40.8% and 45.4% relative to equally guarded BF16, and 29.3% and 37.6% relative to equally guarded blockwise 8-bit, and every restored first update stays within tolerance. Encoding and restoration together take 2.3-2.6$\times$ as long as guarded BF16 but less time than guarded blockwise 8-bit. Searching both moment codes jointly saves under 0.001% more bytes at 6% more codec time, so per-moment rounding suffices. The guarantee covers the first restored update under a pinned Torch operation model; we measure subsequent training empirically.

cs.LG↗

State-Aware Activation Recomputation with Replay Contracts and Selective Preservation

Activation recomputation saves accelerator memory by replaying forward segments during the backward pass, but replay is only correct if it sees the state the original forward pass saw. Mutable buffers, aliased bytes and random-generator state can change in between, so re-executing unchanged code can differentiate a different computation. We make this state explicit. A versioned replay contract specifies what replay must restore, and a joint planner chooses, per segment, between activation retention, whole-buffer snapshots and selective-region preservation, charging each option its measured memory and recovery cost. Independent derivative and byte-level checks validate the contract, and a Torch/JAX cohort retains all 5,900 execution records, including matches, rejections and divergences. On frozen sparse-write H100 workloads, each measured over fifty fresh processes, joint planning reduces paired step time by 18.16% against a correctly costed eager/whole planner at a 44 GiB budget (approximate 97.5% ratio interval $[.8172,.8195]$). At 32 GiB, where the eager/whole planner has no feasible static policy, joint planning is 4.98% faster than fixed regions at 29.94 rather than 26.20 GiB. A complete CIFAR-100 dense-queue application runs seven methods for 100 encoder and 25 probe epochs at six training seeds, with byte-identical test scores within each seed. There, joint planning uses 22.41% more allocated memory than whole snapshots, with a process-time geometric-mean ratio of 1.0080 (seed range $[.9845,1.0191]$). Together, the results map where selective preservation pays off: sparse writes with large activations benefit, while in the dense-queue workload whole snapshots use less allocated memory.

cs.AI↗