Give example on how to handle gradient accumulation with cross-entropy #3193
Conversation
|
The docs for this PR live here. All of your documentation changes will be reflected on that endpoint. The docs are available until 30 days after the last update. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks great! (We need to do the gather() + div by num processes in the trainer still).
Left a few nits, I think it'd be really cool if we can show full training graphs. After doing stuff with FP8 just taking "the end result is the same" at face value I don't fully trust :)
| Results on a single device: | ||
| ``` | ||
| initial model weight is tensor([-0.0075, 0.5364]) | ||
| initial model clone weight is tensor([-0.0075, 0.5364]) | ||
| Step 0 - Device 0 - num items in the local batch 36 | ||
| Total num items 36 | ||
| Device 0 - w/ accumulation, the final model weight is tensor([0.0953, 0.4337]) | ||
| w/o accumulation, the final model weight is tensor([0.0953, 0.4337]) | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| Results on a two devices set-up: | ||
| ``` | ||
| initial model weight is tensor([-0.0075, 0.5364]) | ||
| initial model clone weight is tensor([-0.0075, 0.5364]) | ||
| Step 0 - Device 0 - num items in the local batch 52 | ||
| Step 0 - Device 1 - num items in the local batch 84 | ||
| Total num items 136 | ||
| Device 1 - w/ accumulation, the final model weight is tensor([0.2117, 0.3172]) | ||
| Device 0 - w/ accumulation, the final model weight is tensor([0.2117, 0.3172]) | ||
| w/o accumulation, the final model weight is tensor([0.2117, 0.3172]) | ||
| ``` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Honestly if we can let's even toss up some wandb graphs 🔥
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Indeed, it'd be great, but here we do only one single global batch size, I don't think it's worth adding a graph. Maybe should I modify the current code snippet to do this with multiple global steps ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or add some wandb graphs from the upcoming modif of examples/by_feature/gradient_accumulation ?
| model_optimizer.zero_grad() | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| logger.warning(f"Device {accelerator.process_index} - w/ accumulation, the final model weight is {accelerator.unwrap_model(model).weight.detach().cpu().squeeze()}", main_process_only=False) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Rather than logger.warning, we can do print() here or change the default logging level :) (Just logging.warning rather than logging.info weirds me out)
| num_samples_in_epoch = len(dataloader) | ||
| remainder = num_samples_in_epoch % gradient_accumulation_steps | ||
| remainder = remainder if remainder != 0 else gradient_accumulation_steps | ||
| total_gradient_updates = math.ceil(num_samples_in_epoch / gradient_accumulation_steps) | ||
|
|
||
| total_batched_samples = 0 | ||
| for update_step in range(total_gradient_updates): | ||
| # In order to correctly the total number of non-padded tokens on which we'll compute the cross-entropy loss | ||
| # we need to pre-load the full local batch - i.e the next per_device_batch_size * accumulation_steps samples | ||
| batch_samples = [] | ||
| num_batches_in_step = gradient_accumulation_steps if update_step != (total_gradient_updates - 1) else remainder | ||
| for _ in range(num_batches_in_step): | ||
| batch_samples += [next(training_iterator)] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This only works when we know the size of the dataloader. Can we think of a solution that doesn't require this information ? I think we can just iter on the dataloader until we have gradient_accumulation_steps to create the batch_sample. If we can't iter anymore, then we stop also. I think that code will be easier to understand.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes agreed :) (What we do in the Trainer)
|
|
||
| Results on a single device: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe we can precise the exact setup ? I think that we are doing the following ?
- dp=1 grad_acc= 2 batch_size = 4 vs dp=1 grad_acc= 1 batch_size = 8 ?
If we are only doing one update, then we won't be able to get a graph. Maybe we do this on a larger dataset where batch_size != len(data_loader) and add the graphs.
| Results on a two devices set-up: | ||
| ``` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On a two devices set-up, the modification you did to take into account the dp won't be reflected here as we are only changing grad acc and batch_size. So the loss will be the same nevertheless. However, it's nice to see that the total_num_items really changed:
- dp=2 grad_acc= 2 batch_size = 4 vs dp=2 grad_acc=1 batch_size=8
Maybe we should probably do a separate section/experiment to show the following will have the same loss graph
- dp=2 batch_size =2 is the same as dp=1 batch_size=4. See this experiment for clarification
tests/test_examples.py
Outdated
| def test_gradient_accumulation_for_autoregressive_models(self): | ||
| testargs = ["examples/by_feature/gradient_accumulation_for_autoregressive_models.py"] | ||
| run_command(self.launch_args + testargs) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a nit: this doesn't use gradient accumulation here since it uses the default of 1
examples/by_feature/gradient_accumulation_for_autoregressive_models.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. If you think this still needs to be addressed please comment on this thread. Please note that issues that do not follow the contributing guidelines are likely to be ignored. |
|
any updates? |
…odels.py Co-authored-by: Zach Mueller <[email protected]>
What does this PR do?
Following the recent highlights on how gradient accumulation with the cross-entropy loss is usually off, it could be great to have it mentioned in the doc. I've thus added some code and explanation of it in the gradient accumulation page.
cc @SunMarc and @muellerzr, let me know what you think of it or if I can make this any clearer!