| ▲ | strommec 8 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
It's surprising that Exponential Time Hypothesis would be false. Quoting a paper from 2022[1]: > We prove that the time complexity of self-attention is necessarily quadratic in the input length, unless the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH) is false[...] If OpenAI's proof is correct, does that mean self-attention can be implemented in sub-quadratic time? I.e. we could eventually have all the most advanced LLMs running on cheap hardware? To put it more playfully, is ETH being false actually bearish for Nvidia? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | rokob 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
No, SETH implies quadratic time does not mean !SETH implies !quadratic time. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | caughtinthought 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
SETH is a much stronger claim than ETH | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | refulgentis 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
It's playful! But it's also not even wrong, in the Pauli sense. That makes me wonder if "I see your CS proof, how does this affect LLMs / nvidia stonk price???" being immediately self-described as "playful" ensures criticism looks cranky. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||