Corby's numerically more stable self attn version#118
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR is @corbyrosset's suggestion at how to overcome the 104B numerical instability we have been experiencing. Quoting:
Re: 104B instability (https://huggingface.slack.com/archives/C01NHER1JLS/p1632801340055000) One thing I've encountered before is how the self-attention is computed. E.g. this line shows that the norm_factor may be multiplied after the Query * Key matrix multiplication. If the dim of Q and K are very large, the output may blow up and the norm_factor won't be able to save it.
Proposal: move the norm_factor inward, so Q and K are scaled down before matrix multiply:
To make the operation mathematically equivalent, moving the norm factor inward requires taking sqrt again
if n is a scalar, A and B matrices:
Also thanks to @RezaYazdaniAminabadi who helped to find where this function is defined in CuBlas https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/cublas/index.html#cublas-GemmStridedBatchedEx and which includes the definition:
C+istrideC=αop(A+istrideA)op(B+istrideB)+β(C+istrideC), for i ∈[0,batchCount−1]
the issue is alpha is multiplied after the matrix-matrix mul is done so it can cause instability