Decoding with autoregressive large language models (LLMs) traditionally occurs sequentially, generating one token after another. An emerging line of work explored parallel decoding by identifying and simultaneously generating semantically independent chunks of LLM responses. However, these techniques rely on hand-crafted heuristics tied to syntactic structures like lists and paragraphs, making them rigid and imprecise. We present PASTA, a learning-based system that teaches LLMs to identify semantic independence and express parallel decoding opportunities in their own responses. At its core are PASTA-LANG and its interpreter: PASTA-LANG is an annotation language that enables LLMs to express semantic independence in their own responses; the language interpreter acts on these annotations to orchestrate parallel decoding on-the-fly at inference time. Through a two-stage finetuning process, we train LLMs to generate PASTA-LANG annotations that optimize both response quality and decoding speed. Evaluation on AlpacaEval, an instruction following benchmark, shows that our approach Pareto-dominates existing methods in terms of decoding speed and response quality; our results demonstrate geometric mean speedups ranging from 1.21x to 1.93x with corresponding quality changes of +2.2% to -7.1%, measured by length-controlled win rates against sequential decoding baseline.

Rerankers, typically cross-encoders, are often used to re-score the documents retrieved by cheaper initial IR systems. This is because, though expensive, rerankers are assumed to be more effective. We challenge this assumption by measuring reranker performance for full retrieval, not just re-scoring first-stage retrieval. Our experiments reveal a surprising trend: the best existing rerankers provide diminishing returns when scoring progressively more documents and actually degrade quality beyond a certain limit. In fact, in this setting, rerankers can frequently assign high scores to documents with no lexical or semantic overlap with the query. We hope that our findings will spur future research to improve reranking.

Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) has emerged as a crucial technique for enhancing the accuracy of Large Language Models (LLMs) by incorporating external information. With the advent of LLMs that support increasingly longer context lengths, there is a growing interest in understanding how these models perform in RAG scenarios. Can these new long context models improve RAG performance? This paper presents a comprehensive study of the impact of increased context length on RAG performance across 20 popular open source and commercial LLMs. We ran RAG workflows while varying the total context length from 2,000 to 128,000 tokens (and 2 million tokens when possible) on three domain-specific datasets, and report key insights on the benefits and limitations of long context in RAG applications. Our findings reveal that while retrieving more documents can improve performance, only a handful of the most recent state of the art LLMs can maintain consistent accuracy at long context above 64k tokens. We also identify distinct failure modes in long context scenarios, suggesting areas for future research.

Advanced probabilistic programming languages (PPLs) use hybrid inference systems to combine symbolic exact inference and Monte Carlo methods to improve inference performance. These systems use heuristics to partition random variables within the program into variables that are encoded symbolically and variables that are encoded with sampled values, and the heuristics are not necessarily aligned with the performance evaluation metrics used by the developer. In this work, we present inference plans, a programming interface that enables developers to control the partitioning of random variables during hybrid particle filtering. We further present Siren, a new PPL that enables developers to use annotations to specify inference plans the inference system must implement. To assist developers with statically reasoning about whether an inference plan can be implemented, we present an abstract-interpretation-based static analysis for Siren for determining inference plan satisfiability. We prove the analysis is sound with respect to Siren's semantics. Our evaluation applies inference plans to three different hybrid particle filtering algorithms on a suite of benchmarks and shows that the control provided by inference plans enables speed ups of 1.76x on average and up to 206x to reach target accuracy, compared to the inference plans implemented by default heuristics; the results also show that inference plans improve accuracy by 1.83x on average and up to 595x with less or equal runtime, compared to the default inference plans. We further show that the static analysis is precise in practice, identifying all satisfiable inference plans in 27 out of the 33 benchmark-algorithm combinations.

Large language models such as OpenAI's GPT-4 have become the dominant technology in modern natural language processing (Liu et al., 2023; Zhao et al., 2023). Trained on large corpora to predict the next token and refined with human feedback (Brown et al., 2020; Ouyang et al., 2022; Ziegler et al., 2020), these models develop impressive capabilities in areas such as summarization and questionanswering (Zhang et al., 2023; Goyal et al., 2023; Karpukhin et al., 2020). While the focus has been on these models' performance when responding to general English prompts, it is clear there is potential for specialist models to impact biomedical research and healthcare (Arora and Arora, 2023; Shah et al., 2023; Thirunavukarasu et al., 2023). Such applications include information retrieval and summarization from the ever-expanding biomedical literature (Wang et al., 2021; Yang, 2020), clinical information such as physician notes in electronic health records, and radiology reports (Murray et al., 2021; Feblowitz et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2018). Improving domain-specific language models will help accelerate biomedical discovery, drive down healthcare costs, and improve patient care. Large, general models like GPT-4 and Med-PaLM 2 have set new standards for performance on question-answering and information extraction (Kung et al., 2022; Singhal et al., 2023a,b), but there are several drawbacks to these models. They are costly to train and utilize. Compute for training and inference of large language models have increased 10-to 100-fold since 2015 (Sevilla et al., 2022), translating to extremely high financial and

How does scaling the number of parameters in large language models (LLMs) affect their core capabilities? We study two natural scaling techniques -- weight pruning and simply training a smaller or larger model, which we refer to as dense scaling -- and their effects on two core capabilities of LLMs: (a) recalling facts presented during pre-training and (b) processing information presented in-context during inference. By curating a suite of tasks that help disentangle these two capabilities, we find a striking difference in how these two abilities evolve due to scaling. Reducing the model size by more than 30\% (via either scaling approach) significantly decreases the ability to recall facts seen in pre-training. Yet, a 60--70\% reduction largely preserves the various ways the model can process in-context information, ranging from retrieving answers from a long context to learning parameterized functions from in-context exemplars. The fact that both dense scaling and weight pruning exhibit this behavior suggests that scaling model size has an inherently disparate effect on fact recall and in-context learning.

Programmers and researchers are increasingly developing surrogates of programs, models of a subset of the observable behavior of a given program, to solve a variety of software development challenges. Programmers train surrogates from measurements of the behavior of a program on a dataset of input examples. A key challenge of surrogate construction is determining what training data to use to train a surrogate of a given program. We present a methodology for sampling datasets to train neural-network-based surrogates of programs. We first characterize the proportion of data to sample from each region of a program's input space (corresponding to different execution paths of the program) based on the complexity of learning a surrogate of the corresponding execution path. We next provide a program analysis to determine the complexity of different paths in a program. We evaluate these results on a range of real-world programs, demonstrating that complexity-guided sampling results in empirical improvements in accuracy.

In reinforcement learning, the classic objectives of maximizing discounted and finite-horizon cumulative rewards are PAC-learnable: There are algorithms that learn a near-optimal policy with high probability using a finite amount of samples and computation. In recent years, researchers have introduced objectives and corresponding reinforcement-learning algorithms beyond the classic cumulative rewards, such as objectives specified as linear temporal logic formulas. However, questions about the PAC-learnability of these new objectives have remained open. This work demonstrates the PAC-learnability of general reinforcement-learning objectives through sufficient conditions for PAC-learnability in two analysis settings. In particular, for the analysis that considers only sample complexity, we prove that if an objective given as an oracle is uniformly continuous, then it is PAC-learnable. Further, for the analysis that considers computational complexity, we prove that if an objective is computable, then it is PAC-learnable. In other words, if a procedure computes successive approximations of the objective's value, then the objective is PAC-learnable. We give three applications of our condition on objectives from the literature with previously unknown PAC-learnability and prove that these objectives are PAC-learnable. Overall, our result helps verify existing objectives' PAC-learnability. Also, as some studied objectives that are not uniformly continuous have been shown to be not PAC-learnable, our results could guide the design of new PAC-learnable objectives.

Datacenter operators ensure fair and regular server maintenance by using automated processes to schedule maintenance jobs to complete within a strict time budget. Automating this scheduling problem is challenging because maintenance job duration varies based on both job type and hardware. While it is tempting to use prior machine learning techniques for predicting job duration, we find that the structure of the maintenance job scheduling problem creates a unique challenge. In particular, we show that prior machine learning methods that produce the lowest error predictions do not produce the best scheduling outcomes due to asymmetric costs. Specifically, underpredicting maintenance job duration has results in more servers being taken offline and longer server downtime than overpredicting maintenance job duration. The system cost of underprediction is much larger than that of overprediction. We present Acela, a machine learning system for predicting maintenance job duration, which uses quantile regression to bias duration predictions toward overprediction. We integrate Acela into a maintenance job scheduler and evaluate it on datasets from large-scale, production datacenters. Compared to machine learning based predictors from prior work, Acela reduces the number of servers that are taken offline by 1.87-4.28X, and reduces the server offline time by 1.40-2.80X.

Practitioners frequently observe that pruning improves model generalization. A long-standing hypothesis based on bias-variance trade-off attributes this generalization improvement to model size reduction. However, recent studies on over-parameterization characterize a new model size regime, in which larger models achieve better generalization. Pruning models in this over-parameterized regime leads to a contradiction -- while theory predicts that reducing model size harms generalization, pruning to a range of sparsities nonetheless improves it. Motivated by this contradiction, we re-examine pruning's effect on generalization empirically. We show that size reduction cannot fully account for the generalization-improving effect of standard pruning algorithms. Instead, we find that pruning leads to better training at specific sparsities, improving the training loss over the dense model. We find that pruning also leads to additional regularization at other sparsities, reducing the accuracy degradation due to noisy examples over the dense model. Pruning extends model training time and reduces model size. These two factors improve training and add regularization respectively. We empirically demonstrate that both factors are essential to fully explaining pruning's impact on generalization.