| ▲ | aaroninsf 2 hours ago | |
That sounds like boostrapping the weights involved in early layers, to obviate the need for those layers to learn (optimize) for the distribution in the training set. Makes me wonder idly, - is this conceptually akin in some sense to a "universal grammar," and if so - with a broad enough training set, is there a latent durable universal grammar that might be similarly recovered and injected to the benefit of all training, - does that grammar go beyond morphological/syntactical/grammatical features, into e.g. semantics and pragmatics | ||
| ▲ | pjankiewicz 2 hours ago | parent [-] | |
That was my thinking as well mainly to increase the speed of training. But it may turn out that the simple statistics that you can capture like this may account for 1% of the training and are likely to be captured as the first thing during the training. But actually these techniques are used but they are hidden as speculative decoding with increasing complexity of approximations. For example you can have a part of the network that predicts the next word based on the markov chain, the next approximation is more complex etc. This paper proposes something similar where you can inject memory without training https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.16893 | ||