Revised notes
This commit is contained in:
parent
8768f128fe
commit
65288793ce
@ -1,188 +1,301 @@
|
|||||||
# Transformers
|
# Transformers
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Block Components
|
Transformers are very similar to [`RNNs`](./../8-Recurrent-Networks/INDEX.md)
|
||||||
|
in terms of usage (machine translation, text generation, sequence to
|
||||||
|
sequence, sentimental analysis, word prediction, ...),
|
||||||
|
but differ for how they process data.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The idea is that each Transformer block is made of the **same number** of [`Encoders`](#encoder) and
|
While `RNNs` have a recurrent part that computes the input
|
||||||
[`Decoders`](#decoder)
|
sequentially, `Transformers` computes it all at once, making it easier to
|
||||||
|
parallelize and make it **effectively faster despite being quadratically
|
||||||
|
complex**.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||

|
However this comes at the cost of not having an *infinite context* for
|
||||||
|
tranformers. They have no memory,
|
||||||
|
usually[^infinite-transformer-context][^transformer-xl],
|
||||||
|
meaning that they need to resort to tricks as **autoregressiveness** or
|
||||||
|
fixed context windows.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Basic Technologies
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Positional Encoding
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
When words are processed in our Transformer, since they are processed at
|
||||||
|
once, they may lose their positional information, making them less informative.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
By using a Positional Encoding, we add back this information to the word.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
There are several ways to add such encoding to words, but among these we find:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
- **Learnt One**:\
|
||||||
|
Use another network to learn how to add a positional encoding
|
||||||
|
to the word embedding
|
||||||
|
- **Positional Encoding[^attention-is-all-you-need]**:\
|
||||||
|
This comes from ***"Attention Is All You Need"***[^attention-is-all-you-need]
|
||||||
|
and it's a fixed function that adds alternately the sine and cosine
|
||||||
|
to word embeddings
|
||||||
|
$$
|
||||||
|
\begin{aligned}
|
||||||
|
PE_{(pos, 2i)} &= \sin{\left(
|
||||||
|
\frac{
|
||||||
|
pos
|
||||||
|
}{
|
||||||
|
10000^{2i/d_{model}}
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
\right)}
|
||||||
|
\\
|
||||||
|
PE_{(pos, 2i+1)} &= \cos{\left(
|
||||||
|
\frac{
|
||||||
|
pos
|
||||||
|
}{
|
||||||
|
10000^{2i/d_{model}}
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
\right)}
|
||||||
|
\end{aligned}
|
||||||
|
$$
|
||||||
|
- **RoPE[^rope-paper][^hugging-face-pe]**:\
|
||||||
|
This algorithm uses the same function as above, but it doesn't add it, rather
|
||||||
|
it uses it to rotate (multiply) vectors. The idea is that by rotating a
|
||||||
|
vector, it doesn't change its magnitude and possibly its latent meaning.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Feed Forward
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This is just a couple of linear layers where the first one expands
|
||||||
|
dimensionality (usually by 4 times) of the embedding size, due to
|
||||||
|
Cover Theorem, and then it shrinks it back to the original embedding
|
||||||
|
size.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Self Attention
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This Layer employs 3 matrices, for each attention head, that computes
|
||||||
|
Query, Key and Value vectors for each word embedding.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
#### Steps
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
- Compute $Q, K, V$ matrices for each embedding
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
$$
|
||||||
|
\begin{aligned}
|
||||||
|
Q_{i} &= S \times W_{Qi} \in \R^{S \times H}\\
|
||||||
|
K_{i} &= S \times W_{Ki} \in \R^{S \times H}\\
|
||||||
|
V_{i} &= S \times W_{Vi} \in \R^{S \times H}
|
||||||
|
\end{aligned}
|
||||||
|
$$
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
- Compute the head value
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
$$
|
||||||
|
\begin{aligned}
|
||||||
|
Head_i = softmax\left(
|
||||||
|
\frac{
|
||||||
|
Q_{i} \times K_{i}
|
||||||
|
}{
|
||||||
|
\sqrt{H}
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
\right) \times V_{i}
|
||||||
|
\in \R^{S \times H}
|
||||||
|
\end{aligned}
|
||||||
|
$$
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
- Concatenate all heads and multiply for a learnt matrix
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
$$
|
||||||
|
\begin{aligned}
|
||||||
|
Heads &= concat(Head_1, \dots, Head_n) \in \R^{S \times (n \cdot H)} \\
|
||||||
|
Out &= Heads \times W_{Heads} \in \R^{S \times Em}
|
||||||
|
\end{aligned}
|
||||||
|
$$
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
> [!NOTE]
|
> [!NOTE]
|
||||||
> Input and output are vectors of **fixed size** with padding
|
> Legend for each notation:
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> - $H$: Head dimension
|
||||||
|
> - $S$: Sentence length (number of tokens)
|
||||||
|
> - $i$: head index
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Before feeding our input, we split and embed each word into a fixed vector size. This size depends on the length of
|
> [!TIP]
|
||||||
longest sentence in our training set
|
> $H$ is usually smaller (makes computation faster and memory efficient), however
|
||||||
|
> it's not necessary.
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> Here we shown several operations, however, instead of making many small tensor
|
||||||
|
> multiplications, it's better to perform
|
||||||
|
> one (computationally more efficient) and then split ist result into
|
||||||
|
> its components
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Cross-Attention
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
It's the same as the Self Attention, however we only compute $Q_{i}$ for what
|
||||||
|
comes from the encoder, while $K_i$ and $V_i$ come from inputs coming
|
||||||
|
from the last encoder:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
$$
|
||||||
|
\begin{aligned}
|
||||||
|
Q_{i} &= S_{dec} \times W_{Qi} \in \R^{S \times H}\\
|
||||||
|
K_{i} &= S_{enc} \times W_{Ki} \in \R^{S \times H}\\
|
||||||
|
V_{i} &= S_{enc} \times W_{Vi} \in \R^{S \times H}
|
||||||
|
\end{aligned}
|
||||||
|
$$
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Masking
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
In order to make it sure that a decoder doesn't attent future info for past
|
||||||
|
words, we have masks that makes it sure that information doesn't leak
|
||||||
|
to parts of the networks.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
We usually implement 4 kind of masks
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|

|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
- **Padding Mask**:\
|
||||||
|
This mask is useful to avoid computing attention for paddings
|
||||||
|
- **Full Attention**:
|
||||||
|
This mask is useful in encoders. It allows the attention to have a double
|
||||||
|
directed attention by making words on the right add info to words on
|
||||||
|
the left and vice-versa.
|
||||||
|
- **Causal Attention**:\
|
||||||
|
This mask is useful in decoders. It denies the attention of words on
|
||||||
|
the right to leak over leftwards ones. In other words, it prevents
|
||||||
|
that future words can affect the past meaning.
|
||||||
|
- **Prefix Attention**:\
|
||||||
|
This mask is useful for some task in decoders. It allows some words to
|
||||||
|
add info over the past. These words however are not generated by the decoder,
|
||||||
|
but are part of its initial input.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Basic Blocks
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### Embedder
|
### Embedder
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
While this is not a real component per se, this is the first phase before even coming
|
This layer is responsible of transforming the input (usually tokens) into
|
||||||
to the first `encoder` and `decoder`.
|
word embeddings following these steps:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Here we transform each word of the input into an ***embedding*** and add a vector to account for
|
- one-hot encoding
|
||||||
position. This positional encoding can either be learnt or can follow this formula:
|
- matrix multiplication to get the desired embedding
|
||||||
|
- inclusion of positional info
|
||||||
- Even size:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
$$
|
|
||||||
\text{positional\_encoding}_{
|
|
||||||
(position, 2\text{size})
|
|
||||||
} = \sin\left(
|
|
||||||
\frac{
|
|
||||||
pos
|
|
||||||
}{
|
|
||||||
10000^{
|
|
||||||
\frac{
|
|
||||||
2\text{size}
|
|
||||||
}{
|
|
||||||
\text{model\_depth}
|
|
||||||
}
|
|
||||||
}
|
|
||||||
}
|
|
||||||
\right)
|
|
||||||
$$
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- Odd size:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
$$
|
|
||||||
\text{positional\_encoding}_{
|
|
||||||
(position, 2\text{size} + 1)
|
|
||||||
} = \cos\left(
|
|
||||||
\frac{
|
|
||||||
pos
|
|
||||||
}{
|
|
||||||
10000^{
|
|
||||||
\frac{
|
|
||||||
2\text{size}
|
|
||||||
}{
|
|
||||||
\text{model\_depth}
|
|
||||||
}
|
|
||||||
}
|
|
||||||
}
|
|
||||||
\right)
|
|
||||||
$$
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### Encoder
|
### Encoder
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
> [!CAUTION]
|
It takes meanings from embedded vectors both on the right and left part:
|
||||||
> Weights are not shared between `encoders` or `decoders`
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Each phase happens for each word. In other words, if our embed size is 512, we have 512 `Self Attentions` and
|
- Self Attention
|
||||||
512 `Feed Forward NN` **per `encoder`**
|
- Residual Connection
|
||||||
|
- Layer Normalization
|
||||||
|
- Feed Forward
|
||||||
|
- Residual Connection
|
||||||
|
- Layer Normalization (sometimes it is done before going to self attention)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||

|

|
||||||
|
|
||||||
#### Encoder Self Attention
|
Usually it used to condition all decoders, however, if connected to a
|
||||||
|
`De-Embedding` block or other layers, it can be used stand alone to
|
||||||
> [!WARNING]
|
generate outputs
|
||||||
> This step is the most expensive one as it involves many computations
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Self Attention is a step in which each ***token*** gets the knowledge of previous ones.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
During this step, we produce 3 vectors that are **usually smaller**, for example 64 instead of 512:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- **Queries** $\rightarrow q_{i}$
|
|
||||||
- **Keys** $\rightarrow k_{i}$
|
|
||||||
- **Values** $\rightarrow v_{i}$
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We use these values to compute a **score** that will tell us **how much to focus on certain parts of the sentence
|
|
||||||
while encoding a token**
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
In order to compute the final encoding we do these for each encoding word $i$:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- Compute score for each word $j$ : $\text{score}_{j} = q_{i} \cdot k_{j}$
|
|
||||||
- Divide each score by the square root of the size of these *helping vectors*:
|
|
||||||
$\text{score}_{j} = \frac{\text{score}_{j}}{\sqrt{\text{size}}}$
|
|
||||||
- Compute softmax of all scores
|
|
||||||
- Multiply softmax each score per its value: $\text{score}_{j} = \text{score}_{j} \cdot v_{j}$
|
|
||||||
- Sum them all: $\text{encoding}_{i} = \sum_{j}^{N} \text{score}_{j}$
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
> [!NOTE]
|
|
||||||
> These steps will be done with matrices, not in this sequential way
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
##### Multi-Headed Attention
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Instead of doing the Attention operation once, we do it more times, by having differente matrices to produce
|
|
||||||
our *helping vectors*.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
This produces N encodings for each ***token***, or N matrices of encodings.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The trick here is to **concatenate all encoding matrices** and **learn a new weight matrix** that will
|
|
||||||
**combine them**
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
#### Residuals
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
In order no to lose some information along the path, after each `Feed Forward` and `Self-Attention`
|
|
||||||
we add inputs to each ***sublayer*** `outputs` and we do a `Layer Normalization`
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
#### Encoder Feed Forward NN
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
> [!TIP]
|
|
||||||
> This step is mostly **parallel** as there's no dependency between *neighbour vectors*
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### Decoder
|
### Decoder
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
It takes meaning from output embedded vectors, usually left to right, and
|
||||||
|
condition them with last encoder output.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
- Self Attention
|
||||||
|
- Residual Connection
|
||||||
|
- Layer Normalization
|
||||||
|
- Cross Attention
|
||||||
|
- Residual Connection
|
||||||
|
- Layer Normalization
|
||||||
|
- Feed Forward
|
||||||
|
- Residual Connection
|
||||||
|
- Layer Normalization (sometimes it is done before going to self attention)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|

|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Usually this block is used to generate outptus autoregressively, meaning
|
||||||
|
that we'll only take $out_{k}$ as the actual output and append it as $in_{k+1}$
|
||||||
|
during inference time.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
> [!WARNING]
|
||||||
|
> During train time, we are going to feed it all expected sequence, but shifted
|
||||||
|
> by a `start` token, predicting the whole sequence again.
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> So, **it isn't trained autoregressively**
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### De-Embedding
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Before having a result, we de-embed results, coming to a known format.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Usually, for text generation, this makes the whole problem a classification one
|
||||||
|
as we need to predict the right token among all available ones.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Usually, for text, it is implemented as this:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
- Linear layer -> Go back to token space dimensions
|
||||||
|
- Softmax -> Transform into probabilities
|
||||||
|
- Argmax -> Take the most probable one
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
However, depending on the objectives, this is subject to change
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Basic Architectures
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Full Transformer (aka Encoder Decoder - Encoder Conditioned)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This architecture is very powerful, but ***"with great power, comes a great
|
||||||
|
energy bill"***. While it has been successfully used in models like `T5`[^t5],
|
||||||
|
it comes with additional complexity, both over the coding part and the
|
||||||
|
computational one.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|

|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This is the basic architecture proposed in ***"Attention Is All You Need"***
|
||||||
|
[^attention-is-all-you-need], but nowadays has been supersided by decoder only
|
||||||
|
architectures, for tasks as text generation.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Encoder Only
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This architecture is done by only employing encoders at its base. A model using
|
||||||
|
this architecture is `BERT`[^bert], which is capable of tasks such as Masked
|
||||||
|
Langauge Model, Sentimental Analysis, Feature Extraction and General
|
||||||
|
Classification (as for e-mails).
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|

|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
However this architecture comes at the cost of not being good at text and
|
||||||
|
sequence generation, but has the advantage of being able to process everything
|
||||||
|
in one step.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Decoder Only
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This architecture employs only decoders, which are modified to get ridden of
|
||||||
|
cross-attention. Usually this is at the base of modern LLMS such as
|
||||||
|
`GPT`[^gpt-2]. This architecture is capable of generating text, summarizing and
|
||||||
|
music (converting into MIDI format).
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|

|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
However this architecture needs time to generate, due to its autoregressive
|
||||||
|
nature.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Curiosities
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
> [!NOTE]
|
> [!NOTE]
|
||||||
> The decoding phase is slower than the encoding one, as it is sequential, producing a token for each iteration.
|
> We call $Q$ as `Query`, $K$ as `Key` and $V$ as `Value`. Their names
|
||||||
> However it can be sped up by producing several tokerns at once
|
> come from an interpretation given to how they interact together, like
|
||||||
|
> if were to search for `Key` over the `Query` Box and the found items is
|
||||||
|
> `Value`.
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> However this is only an analogy and not the actual process.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
After the **last `Encoder`** has produced its `output`, $K$ and $V$ vectors, these are then used by
|
<!--
|
||||||
**all `Decoders`** during their self attention step, meaning they are **shared** among all `Decoders`.
|
MARK: Footnotes
|
||||||
|
-->
|
||||||
|
[^infinite-transformer-context]: [Leave No Context Behind: Efficient Infinite Context Transformers with Infini-attention](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2404.07143)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
All `Decoders` steps are then **repeated until we get a `<eos>` token** which will tell the decoder to stop.
|
[^transformer-xl]: [Transformer-XL: Attentive Language Models Beyond a Fixed-Length Context](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.02860)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
#### Decoder Self Attention
|
[^attention-is-all-you-need]: [Attention Is All You Need](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1706.03762)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
It's almost the same as in the `encoding` phase, though here, since we have no future `outputs`, we can only take into
|
[^rope-paper]: [ROFORMER: ENHANCED TRANSFORMER WITH ROTARY POSITION EMBEDDING](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2104.09864)
|
||||||
account only previous ***tokens***, by setting future ones to `-inf`.
|
|
||||||
Moreover, here the `Key` and `Values` Mappings come from the `encoder` pase, while the
|
|
||||||
`Queue` Mapping is learnt here.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
#### Final Steps
|
[^hugging-face-pe]: [Hugging Face | Positional Encoding | 2nd November 2025](https://huggingface.co/blog/designing-positional-encoding)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
##### Linear Layer
|
[^t5]: [Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1910.10683)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Produces a vector of ***logits***, one per each ***known words***.
|
[^bert]: [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.04805)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
##### Softmax Layer
|
[^gpt-2]: [Release Strategies and the Social Impacts of Language Models | GPT 2](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.09203)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We then score these ***logits*** over a `SoftMax` to get probabilities. We then take the highest one, usually.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
If we implement ***Temperature***, though, we can take some `tokens` that are less probable, but having less predictability and
|
|
||||||
have some results that feel more natural.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Training a Transformer
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
<!-- TODO: See PDF 12 pg. 58 to 65 -->
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Known Transformers
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers)
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Differently from other `Transformers`, it uses only `Encoder` blocks.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
It can be used as a classifier and can be fine tuned.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The fine tuning happens by **masking** input and **predict** the **masked word**:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- 15% of total words in input are masked
|
|
||||||
- 80% will become a `[masked]` token
|
|
||||||
- 10% will become random words
|
|
||||||
- 10% will remain unchanged
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
#### Bert tasks
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- **Classification**
|
|
||||||
- **Fine Tuning**
|
|
||||||
- **2 sentences tasks**
|
|
||||||
- **Are they paraphrases?**
|
|
||||||
- **Does one sentence follow from this other one?**
|
|
||||||
- **Feature Extraction**: "Allows us to extract feature to use in our model
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
### GPT-2
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Differently from other `Transformers`, it uses only `Decoder` blocks.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Since it has no `encoders`, `GPT-2` takes `outputs` and append them to the original `input`. This is called **autoregression**.
|
|
||||||
This, however, limits `GPT-2` on how to learn context on `input` because of `masking`.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
During `evaluation`, `GPT-2` does not recompute `V`, `K` and `Q` for previous tokens, but hold on their previosu values.
|
|
||||||
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user