new

Get trending papers in your email inbox!

Subscribe

Daily Papers

byAK and the research community

Oct 7

POLAR: Online Learning for LoRA Adapter Caching and Routing in Edge LLM Serving

Edge deployment of large language models (LLMs) increasingly relies on libraries of lightweight LoRA adapters, yet GPU/DRAM can keep only a small resident subset at a time. Serving a request through a non-resident adapter requires paging its weights from storage, incurring measurable latency. This creates a two-timescale online control problem: on a slow timescale, the system selects which adapters remain resident in fast memory, while on a fast timescale it routes each request to an adapter whose context-dependent utility is unknown a priori. The two decisions are tightly coupled: the cache determines the cost of exploration, and the router determines which adapters receive informative feedback. We formulate this joint caching-and-routing problem as a two-timescale contextual bandit and propose POLAR (Paging and Online Learning for Adapter Routing). POLAR pairs a cache-aware LinUCB router with an epoch-based cache controller. We study two variants. A fixed-epoch version provides a robust baseline with worst-case regret guarantees under arbitrary contexts. An epoch-doubling version, POLAR+, adds forced exploration and improved cache optimization to achieve mathcal{O}(dNT+KT) sublinear regret under stochastic regularity and cacheability conditions, where N is the adapter count, K the cache size, d the context dimension, and T the horizon. The routing term matches the standard contextual-bandit rate up to logarithmic factors, showing that the memory hierarchy does not fundamentally slow routing learning. Experiments using 15 real LoRA adapters for Qwen2.5-7B together with measured GPU paging latencies show that adaptive cache control substantially outperforms non-adaptive baselines and exhibits scaling trends consistent with the theory.

  • 2 authors
·
Apr 16

More on the Weak Gravity Conjecture via Convexity of Charged Operators

The Weak Gravity Conjecture has recently been re-formulated in terms of a particle with non-negative self-binding energy. Because of the dual conformal field theory (CFT) formulation in the anti-de Sitter space the conformal dimension Delta (Q) of the lowest-dimension operator with charge Q under some global U(1) symmetry must be a convex function of Q. This property has been conjectured to hold for any (unitary) conformal field theory and generalized to larger global symmetry groups. Here we refine and further test the convex charge conjecture via semiclassical computations for fixed charge sectors of different theories in different dimensions. We analyze the convexity properties of the leading and next-to-leading order terms stemming from the semiclassical computation, de facto, extending previous tests beyond the leading perturbative contributions and to arbitrary charges. In particular, the leading contribution is sufficient to test convexity in the semiclassical computations. We also consider intriguing cases in which the models feature a transition from real to complex conformal dimensions either as a function of the charge or number of matter fields. As a relevant example of the first kind, we investigate the O(N) model in 4+epsilon dimensions. As an example of the second type we consider the U(N)times U(M) model in 4-epsilon dimensions. Both models display a rich dynamics where, by changing the number of matter fields and/or charge, one can achieve dramatically different physical regimes. We discover that whenever a complex conformal dimension appears, the real part satisfies the convexity property.

  • 5 authors
·
Sep 10, 2021

Measuring the Intrinsic Dimension of Objective Landscapes

Many recently trained neural networks employ large numbers of parameters to achieve good performance. One may intuitively use the number of parameters required as a rough gauge of the difficulty of a problem. But how accurate are such notions? How many parameters are really needed? In this paper we attempt to answer this question by training networks not in their native parameter space, but instead in a smaller, randomly oriented subspace. We slowly increase the dimension of this subspace, note at which dimension solutions first appear, and define this to be the intrinsic dimension of the objective landscape. The approach is simple to implement, computationally tractable, and produces several suggestive conclusions. Many problems have smaller intrinsic dimensions than one might suspect, and the intrinsic dimension for a given dataset varies little across a family of models with vastly different sizes. This latter result has the profound implication that once a parameter space is large enough to solve a problem, extra parameters serve directly to increase the dimensionality of the solution manifold. Intrinsic dimension allows some quantitative comparison of problem difficulty across supervised, reinforcement, and other types of learning where we conclude, for example, that solving the inverted pendulum problem is 100 times easier than classifying digits from MNIST, and playing Atari Pong from pixels is about as hard as classifying CIFAR-10. In addition to providing new cartography of the objective landscapes wandered by parameterized models, the method is a simple technique for constructively obtaining an upper bound on the minimum description length of a solution. A byproduct of this construction is a simple approach for compressing networks, in some cases by more than 100 times.

  • 4 authors
·
Apr 24, 2018

Numerical Approximation Capacity of Neural Networks with Bounded Parameters: Do Limits Exist, and How Can They Be Measured?

The Universal Approximation Theorem posits that neural networks can theoretically possess unlimited approximation capacity with a suitable activation function and a freely chosen or trained set of parameters. However, a more practical scenario arises when these neural parameters, especially the nonlinear weights and biases, are bounded. This leads us to question: Does the approximation capacity of a neural network remain universal, or does it have a limit when the parameters are practically bounded? And if it has a limit, how can it be measured? Our theoretical study indicates that while universal approximation is theoretically feasible, in practical numerical scenarios, Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) with any analytic activation functions (such as Tanh and Sigmoid) can only be approximated by a finite-dimensional vector space under a bounded nonlinear parameter space (NP space), whether in a continuous or discrete sense. Based on this study, we introduce the concepts of ε outer measure and Numerical Span Dimension (NSdim) to quantify the approximation capacity limit of a family of networks both theoretically and practically. Furthermore, drawing on our new theoretical study and adopting a fresh perspective, we strive to understand the relationship between back-propagation neural networks and random parameter networks (such as the Extreme Learning Machine (ELM)) with both finite and infinite width. We also aim to provide fresh insights into regularization, the trade-off between width and depth, parameter space, width redundancy, condensation, and other related important issues.

  • 3 authors
·
Sep 25, 2024

Geometric Deep Learning: Grids, Groups, Graphs, Geodesics, and Gauges

The last decade has witnessed an experimental revolution in data science and machine learning, epitomised by deep learning methods. Indeed, many high-dimensional learning tasks previously thought to be beyond reach -- such as computer vision, playing Go, or protein folding -- are in fact feasible with appropriate computational scale. Remarkably, the essence of deep learning is built from two simple algorithmic principles: first, the notion of representation or feature learning, whereby adapted, often hierarchical, features capture the appropriate notion of regularity for each task, and second, learning by local gradient-descent type methods, typically implemented as backpropagation. While learning generic functions in high dimensions is a cursed estimation problem, most tasks of interest are not generic, and come with essential pre-defined regularities arising from the underlying low-dimensionality and structure of the physical world. This text is concerned with exposing these regularities through unified geometric principles that can be applied throughout a wide spectrum of applications. Such a 'geometric unification' endeavour, in the spirit of Felix Klein's Erlangen Program, serves a dual purpose: on one hand, it provides a common mathematical framework to study the most successful neural network architectures, such as CNNs, RNNs, GNNs, and Transformers. On the other hand, it gives a constructive procedure to incorporate prior physical knowledge into neural architectures and provide principled way to build future architectures yet to be invented.

  • 4 authors
·
Apr 27, 2021

Continual Learning in Transition

Classical continual learning (CL) has primarily focused on enabling models to update and retain knowledge through parameter-centric mechanisms, e.g., training strategies, architectural designs, and weight adaptation. However, emerging paradigms are reshaping the scope of CL beyond this traditional model adaptation view. For instance, on-policy learning broadens the space of update mechanisms; test-time training extends CL from the training phase to inference; and external harness components such as memory, skill libraries, and interaction protocols extend the evolutionary boundaries of model capabilities far beyond the static parameter space. Collectively, these developments indicate a transition from parameter-centric learning toward system-level adaptation. To characterize this transition, we examine the evolution of continual learning through three dimensions: When, How, and Where learning occurs. The How dimension encompasses off-policy, on-policy, and beyond-gradient optimization mechanics. The When dimension captures evolution across pre-training, post-training, and inference-time stages. The Where dimension delineates updates occurring within internal parameters versus external structural constraints. Anchored by this tri-axial framework, we systematically survey representative methods, trace the ongoing transition of continual learning, and discuss the key challenges, broader implications, and future directions arising from this paradigm shift.

Model-agnostic Measure of Generalization Difficulty

The measure of a machine learning algorithm is the difficulty of the tasks it can perform, and sufficiently difficult tasks are critical drivers of strong machine learning models. However, quantifying the generalization difficulty of machine learning benchmarks has remained challenging. We propose what is to our knowledge the first model-agnostic measure of the inherent generalization difficulty of tasks. Our inductive bias complexity measure quantifies the total information required to generalize well on a task minus the information provided by the data. It does so by measuring the fractional volume occupied by hypotheses that generalize on a task given that they fit the training data. It scales exponentially with the intrinsic dimensionality of the space over which the model must generalize but only polynomially in resolution per dimension, showing that tasks which require generalizing over many dimensions are drastically more difficult than tasks involving more detail in fewer dimensions. Our measure can be applied to compute and compare supervised learning, reinforcement learning and meta-learning generalization difficulties against each other. We show that applied empirically, it formally quantifies intuitively expected trends, e.g. that in terms of required inductive bias, MNIST < CIFAR10 < Imagenet and fully observable Markov decision processes (MDPs) < partially observable MDPs. Further, we show that classification of complex images < few-shot meta-learning with simple images. Our measure provides a quantitative metric to guide the construction of more complex tasks requiring greater inductive bias, and thereby encourages the development of more sophisticated architectures and learning algorithms with more powerful generalization capabilities.

  • 6 authors
·
May 1, 2023

Representational Capacity: Geometric Limits on Feature Representation in Transformer Language Models

Model dimension (d_{model}) is a fundamental hyperparameter in transformer language models, yet its role in setting the geometric limits of feature representation remains under-explored. Grounded in the Linear Representation and Superposition Hypotheses - which propose that models encode features as near-orthogonal directions in latent space - we develop a framework for estimating how many such directions a model can support. We first establish the embedding matrix as a measurable proxy for near-orthogonality constraints across the latent space: the boundary between meaningful token relationships and incidental similarity in the pairwise cosine similarity distribution gives a concrete estimate of the model's accepted deviation varepsilon from perfect orthogonality. Applying this metric across dozens of open-source models reveals two classes: models with high varepsilon whose embeddings lack near-orthogonal structure, and models with low varepsilon that maintain it. We then show that the standard Johnson-Lindenstrauss lemma greatly underestimates the packing efficiency of trained representations, and derive an adjusted capacity formula in which the number of near-orthogonal directions depends on the ratio of vectors to dimensions (k/d) rather than the raw count - a single modification that cuts prediction error by two orders of magnitude with no extra parameters. Combining these results, we define representational capacity as an upper bound on the number of distinguishable directions available for features and embeddings in a model's latent space. Capacity is exponentially sensitive to varepsilon, and larger models favor tighter orthogonality constraints over maximizing raw capacity - a pattern compatible with several explanations (a stability-capacity trade-off, a ceiling on usable concepts, or confounds with model scale) that we leave to future work.

  • 1 authors
·
May 31