Papers
arxiv:2407.01906

Let the Expert Stick to His Last: Expert-Specialized Fine-Tuning for Sparse Architectural Large Language Models

Published on Jul 2
· Submitted by philschmid on Jul 5
#2 Paper of the day
Authors:
,
,
,
,
,

Abstract

Parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) is crucial for customizing Large Language Models (LLMs) with constrained resources. Although there have been various PEFT methods for dense-architecture LLMs, PEFT for sparse-architecture LLMs is still underexplored. In this work, we study the PEFT method for LLMs with the Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture and the contents of this work are mainly threefold: (1) We investigate the dispersion degree of the activated experts in customized tasks, and found that the routing distribution for a specific task tends to be highly concentrated, while the distribution of activated experts varies significantly across different tasks. (2) We propose Expert-Specialized Fine-Tuning, or ESFT, which tunes the experts most relevant to downstream tasks while freezing the other experts and modules; experimental results demonstrate that our method not only improves the tuning efficiency, but also matches or even surpasses the performance of full-parameter fine-tuning. (3) We further analyze the impact of the MoE architecture on expert-specialized fine-tuning. We find that MoE models with finer-grained experts are more advantageous in selecting the combination of experts that are most relevant to downstream tasks, thereby enhancing both the training efficiency and effectiveness.

Community

Paper submitter

ESFT aims to efficiently customize Large Language Models (LLMs) with Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture by adjusting only task-relevant parts, improving efficiency and performance while using fewer resources and storage.
Highlights:

  • Train only task-relevant experts for LLM customization.
  • Reduces storage by up to 90% and training time by up to 30%.

Performance:

  • Customizes LLMs efficiently, nearing Full-Parameter Fine-Tuning (FFT) performance (50.2 vs 51.0).
  • Retains high performance in Math and Code tasks (39.8 vs 40.5) compared to FFT (31.5) and LoRA (28.5).

Sign up or log in to comment

Models citing this paper 1

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2407.01906 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2407.01906 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 8