| WEBVTT |
| X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=LOCAL:00:00:00.000,MPEGTS:144533 |
|
|
| 1 |
| 00:00:02.102 --> 00:00:03.336
|
| In this lesson, you'll get a |
|
|
| 2 |
| 00:00:03.336 --> 00:00:06.373
|
| sense of some common challenges
|
| when it comes to applying low-bit |
|
|
| 3 |
| 00:00:06.406 --> 00:00:10.410
|
| quantization, such as 2 or 4 bits
|
| by diving into weight spiking. |
|
|
| 4 |
| 00:00:11.177 --> 00:00:14.381
|
| In addition,
|
| you'll wrap up the course by some insights |
|
|
| 5 |
| 00:00:14.381 --> 00:00:17.083
|
| into state of the art quantization
|
| methods. |
|
|
| 6 |
| 00:00:17.083 --> 00:00:20.086
|
| Let's pack some weights. |
|
|
| 7 |
| 00:00:21.087 --> 00:00:22.489
|
| In this lesson, |
|
|
| 8 |
| 00:00:22.489 --> 00:00:25.925
|
| we are going to discuss about
|
| the common challenges that you can face |
|
|
| 9 |
| 00:00:26.092 --> 00:00:30.130
|
| when you want to try out
|
| low bit quantization, such as 2 or 4 bit. |
|
|
| 10 |
| 00:00:30.563 --> 00:00:34.000
|
| And we're going to implement from scratch
|
| weight packing. |
|
|
| 11 |
| 00:00:34.167 --> 00:00:36.036
|
| So specifically in this lesson
|
| you will learn |
|
|
| 12 |
| 00:00:36.036 --> 00:00:39.039
|
| why weight spiking is important
|
| for storing quantized weights. |
|
|
| 13 |
| 00:00:39.506 --> 00:00:42.409
|
| We'll also store and load two
|
| and four-bit weights |
|
|
| 14 |
| 00:00:42.409 --> 00:00:45.412
|
| in a packed unsigned int8 tensor. |
|
|
| 15 |
| 00:00:45.445 --> 00:00:47.113
|
| And we will also see together |
|
|
| 16 |
| 00:00:47.113 --> 00:00:50.483
|
| other challenges with quantizing
|
| generative models such as LLMs. |
|
|
| 17 |
| 00:00:50.817 --> 00:00:54.721
|
| And quickly review some state of the art
|
| LLM quantization methods. |
|
|
| 18 |
| 00:00:54.821 --> 00:00:56.089
|
| So let's get started. |
|
|
| 19 |
| 00:00:56.089 --> 00:00:59.159
|
| So before starting the lab,
|
| I wanted to give some small context |
|
|
| 20 |
| 00:00:59.159 --> 00:01:01.828
|
| on why packing is important
|
| and why do we need packing |
|
|
| 21 |
| 00:01:01.828 --> 00:01:03.363
|
| when storing quantized weights. |
|
|
| 22 |
| 00:01:03.363 --> 00:01:05.131
|
| So assume you have quantized. |
|
|
| 23 |
| 00:01:05.131 --> 00:01:07.567
|
| You want to quantize your model
|
| in four-bit precision, |
|
|
| 24 |
| 00:01:07.567 --> 00:01:09.936
|
| and you want to store the weights
|
| in a torch tensor. |
|
|
| 25 |
| 00:01:09.936 --> 00:01:12.305
|
| So ideally
|
| you want to call something like this. |
|
|
| 26 |
| 00:01:12.305 --> 00:01:15.408
|
| Or you want to create a tensor
|
| with some values. |
|
|
| 27 |
| 00:01:15.408 --> 00:01:19.012
|
| And then probably pass dtype=torch.int4. |
|
|
| 28 |
| 00:01:19.312 --> 00:01:22.949
|
| Or you can also do it
|
| after cast to tensor int4. |
|
|
| 29 |
| 00:01:22.949 --> 00:01:25.351
|
| But the problem
|
| is that the time at the time we speak, |
|
|
| 30 |
| 00:01:25.351 --> 00:01:29.889
|
| there is no native support
|
| for four-bit weights in PyTorch. |
|
|
| 31 |
| 00:01:30.523 --> 00:01:34.794
|
| So we need to find a way to store those
|
| four-bit weights in an efficient manner. |
|
|
| 32 |
| 00:01:34.794 --> 00:01:39.199
|
| So right now the only possible solution
|
| is instead of saving the tensor |
|
|
| 33 |
| 00:01:39.199 --> 00:01:44.199
|
| in four-bit, we have to save it in
|
| eight-bit as currently it's |
|
|
| 34 |
| 00:01:44.304 --> 00:01:48.341
|
| the data type with the smallest precision
|
| that is available in PyTorch. |
|
|
| 35 |
| 00:01:48.475 --> 00:01:51.144
|
| So in practice
|
| we need to save the tensor in eight-bit. |
|
|
| 36 |
| 00:01:51.144 --> 00:01:56.015
|
| But this is not really ideal
|
| because the tensor will occupy eight-bit |
|
|
| 37 |
| 00:01:56.015 --> 00:01:56.983
|
| per data point. |
|
|
| 38 |
| 00:01:56.983 --> 00:02:00.220
|
| Despite in practice
|
| it will only need four-bits |
|
|
| 39 |
| 00:02:00.220 --> 00:02:03.957
|
| because you have encoded your parameters
|
| in four-bit precision, |
|
|
| 40 |
| 00:02:03.957 --> 00:02:08.128
|
| so it will definitely add
|
| considerable overhead for large models. |
|
|
| 41 |
| 00:02:08.394 --> 00:02:10.730
|
| Therefore,
|
| if we go for the naive approach, |
|
|
| 42 |
| 00:02:10.730 --> 00:02:13.766
|
| meaning if we store the four-bit weights
|
| in an eight-bit tensor, |
|
|
| 43 |
| 00:02:13.967 --> 00:02:17.237
|
| there will be no point
|
| quantizing the model into four-bit |
|
|
| 44 |
| 00:02:17.604 --> 00:02:20.607
|
| because all the parameters will be stored
|
| in eight-bit precision. |
|
|
| 45 |
| 00:02:20.740 --> 00:02:25.612
|
| So for that, we need to pack the four-bit
|
| weights into eight-bit tensor. |
|
|
| 46 |
| 00:02:25.645 --> 00:02:28.648
|
| So how those packing work in detail. |
|
|
| 47 |
| 00:02:28.648 --> 00:02:31.284
|
| So consider the tensor below that stores |
|
|
| 48 |
| 00:02:31.284 --> 00:02:34.454
|
| four values that can be represented
|
| in two-bit precision. |
|
|
| 49 |
| 00:02:34.687 --> 00:02:38.424
|
| So recall in two-bit precision
|
| you can encode four values. |
|
|
| 50 |
| 00:02:38.424 --> 00:02:43.424
|
| So in case of base two we can encode 0123. |
|
|
| 51 |
| 00:02:44.063 --> 00:02:47.333
|
| So we can code at most four values
|
| two to the power of two. |
|
|
| 52 |
| 00:02:47.734 --> 00:02:50.537
|
| And those values will be 012 and three. |
|
|
| 53 |
| 00:02:50.537 --> 00:02:54.474
|
| So imagine
|
| we have the a parameter of a model |
|
|
| 54 |
| 00:02:54.474 --> 00:02:57.443
|
| which we have encoded
|
| in two-bit precision. |
|
|
| 55 |
| 00:02:57.844 --> 00:02:59.846
|
| And these are the parameters of the model. |
|
|
| 56 |
| 00:02:59.846 --> 00:03:03.917
|
| So right now in PyTorch we can store
|
| the model weights in two-bits. |
|
|
| 57 |
| 00:03:03.950 --> 00:03:06.920
|
| So we have to store them in a bit
|
| precision. |
|
|
| 58 |
| 00:03:06.920 --> 00:03:11.724
|
| So we'll have to end up with such a tensor
|
| that will take four times |
|
|
| 59 |
| 00:03:11.958 --> 00:03:14.961
|
| eight-bits
|
| in terms of memory memory footprint. |
|
|
| 60 |
| 00:03:14.994 --> 00:03:18.464
|
| So currently this weight tensor
|
| is encoded as |
|
|
| 61 |
| 00:03:19.065 --> 00:03:22.101
|
| so, 1 in 8 bit, 0 in 8 bit, |
|
|
| 62 |
| 00:03:22.402 --> 00:03:25.405
|
| 3 in 8 bits and 2 in eight-bits. |
|
|
| 63 |
| 00:03:25.605 --> 00:03:29.542
|
| So as I said this is not really optimal
|
| because you need to allocate four times |
|
|
| 64 |
| 00:03:29.542 --> 00:03:32.545
|
| eight-bits in terms of memory
|
| in order to store |
|
|
| 65 |
| 00:03:32.612 --> 00:03:35.615
|
| weights that can be encoded only in two bit. |
|
|
| 66 |
| 00:03:35.782 --> 00:03:40.353
|
| So what can we do to ignore these bits
|
| that we don't need? |
|
|
| 67 |
| 00:03:40.887 --> 00:03:45.558
|
| That's exactly what packing does
|
| and addresses this challenge by packing |
|
|
| 68 |
| 00:03:45.625 --> 00:03:50.496
|
| only the relevant bits
|
| all together in a single eight-bit tensor. |
|
|
| 69 |
| 00:03:50.830 --> 00:03:55.830
|
| So if let's say we're going to pack
|
| these four weights in a single bit tensor. |
|
|
| 70 |
| 00:03:56.169 --> 00:03:58.204
|
| So we're going to start
|
| with the right one. |
|
|
| 71 |
| 00:03:58.204 --> 00:04:01.307
|
| Then we're going to insert it
|
| in our new eight-bit parameter. |
|
|
| 72 |
| 00:04:01.307 --> 00:04:04.944
|
| So one zero we're going to put one zero |
|
|
| 73 |
| 00:04:04.944 --> 00:04:08.514
|
| on the first bits in the first bits
|
| of our new eight-bit parameter. |
|
|
| 74 |
| 00:04:08.548 --> 00:04:12.118
|
| And then 110001. |
|
|
| 75 |
| 00:04:12.752 --> 00:04:17.123
|
| And if we store that in eight-
|
| bits, we'll end up having a new tensor |
|
|
| 76 |
| 00:04:17.123 --> 00:04:19.859
|
| with only a single value
|
| instead of four values. |
|
|
| 77 |
| 00:04:19.859 --> 00:04:24.859
|
| But this time this tensor encodes all the
|
| parameters that are stored in two-bits. |
|
|
| 78 |
| 00:04:25.164 --> 00:04:29.836
|
| So this value in uint8
|
| will end up being 177. |
|
|
| 79 |
| 00:04:30.203 --> 00:04:34.374
|
| So the advantage of packing is that it
|
| reflects the true |
|
|
| 80 |
| 00:04:34.774 --> 00:04:37.677
|
| or real memory
|
| footprint of the quantized weights. |
|
|
| 81 |
| 00:04:37.677 --> 00:04:41.714
|
| So again, if we go for the naive approach
|
| when we need to allocate four times |
|
|
| 82 |
| 00:04:41.714 --> 00:04:44.951
|
| eight-bit precision,
|
| whereas for the packed case |
|
|
| 83 |
| 00:04:44.951 --> 00:04:48.554
|
| we only need to store a single parameter
|
| in eight-bit precision |
|
|
| 84 |
| 00:04:48.955 --> 00:04:53.760
|
| that will store all the two bit parameters
|
| that we have. |
|
|
| 85 |
| 00:04:54.093 --> 00:04:56.362
|
| Of course, this has to come with a price. |
|
|
| 86 |
| 00:04:56.362 --> 00:05:00.133
|
| Whenever we want to perform inference,
|
| we need to unpack the weights |
|
|
| 87 |
| 00:05:00.366 --> 00:05:05.038
|
| to come back to this state,
|
| because, most of the operations |
|
|
| 88 |
| 00:05:05.338 --> 00:05:09.075
|
| are not supported in native two-bit
|
| or four-bit in PyTorch. |
|
|
| 89 |
| 00:05:09.342 --> 00:05:12.879
|
| And also,
|
| the unpacked tensors need to have a shape |
|
|
| 90 |
| 00:05:12.879 --> 00:05:16.182
|
| with a multiple of n divided
|
| by the number of bits. |
|
|
| 91 |
| 00:05:16.215 --> 00:05:21.215
|
| And so if we have five parameters,
|
| we'll need to allocate an extra eight-bit |
|
|
| 92 |
| 00:05:21.454 --> 00:05:25.692
|
| parameter here that will only encode
|
| a single two-bit value. |
|
|
| 93 |
| 00:05:25.725 --> 00:05:30.063
|
| So ideally we need to have eight
|
| divided by nine bits in case of two. |
|
|
| 94 |
| 00:05:30.296 --> 00:05:35.101
|
| Four we need to have multiple
|
| of four parameters in the single tensor. |
|
|
| 95 |
| 00:05:35.234 --> 00:05:35.568
|
| Yeah. |
|
|
| 96 |
| 00:05:35.568 --> 00:05:38.571
|
| So let's see how does it looks like
|
| in terms of implementation. |
|
|
| 97 |
| 00:05:38.738 --> 00:05:40.406
|
| And we're going to move on to the lab. |
|
|
|
|