The DOI matches its DataCite record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
From Sparse to Soft Mixtures of Experts
Open accessAbstract
Sparse mixture of expert architectures (MoEs) scale model capacity without significant increases in training or inference costs. Despite their success, MoEs suffer from a number of issues: training instability, token dropping, inability to scale the number of experts, or ineffective finetuning. In this work, we propose Soft MoE, a fully-differentiable sparse Transformer that addresses these challenges, while maintaining the benefits of MoEs. Soft MoE performs an implicit soft assignment by passing different weighted combinations of all input tokens to each expert. As in other MoEs, experts in Soft MoE only process a subset of the (combined) tokens, enabling larger model capacity (and performance) at lower inference cost. In the context of visual recognition, Soft MoE greatly outperforms dense Transformers (ViTs) and popular MoEs (Tokens Choice and Experts Choice). Furthermore, Soft MoE scales well: Soft MoE Huge/14 with 128 experts in 16 MoE layers has over 40x more parameters than ViT Huge/14, with only 2% increased inference time, and substantially better quality.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The reason for non-determinism with temperature zero is still controversial, with hypotheses such as floating point, unreliable GPU calculations, and sparse MoE architecture failing to enforce per-sequence determinism.
“The reason for such non-determinism with the temperature being zero is still controversial [1], with different hypotheses such as floating point, unreliable GPU calculations, and its sparse MoE architecture failing to enforce per-sequence determinism [44, 54].”
From An Empirical Study of the Non-Determinism of ChatGPT in Code Generation (2025) · cites this paper as [54]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models
Kaplan, J., McCandlish, S., Henighan, T., Brown, T. B., Chess, B., Child, R., Gray, S., Radford, A., Wu, J., & Amodei, D. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.08361 · Cited by 9,550 · cited 1×
“Recent studies suggest that model size and training data must be scaled together to optimally use any given training compute budget (Kaplan et al., 2020; Hoffmann et al., 2022; Zhai et al., 2022a).”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
An Empirical Study of the Non-Determinism of ChatGPT in Code Generation
Ouyang, S., Zhang, J. M., Harman, M., & Wang, M. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology · doi:10.1145/3697010 · Cited by 258
“The reason for such non-determinism with the temperature being zero is still controversial [1], with different hypotheses such as floating point, unreliable GPU calculations, and its sparse MoE architecture failing to enforce per-sequence determinism [44, 54].”
A Survey: Collaborative Hardware and Software Design in the Era of Large Language Models
Guo, C., Cheng, F., Du, Z., Kiessling, J., Ku, J., Li, S., Li, Z., Ma, M., Molom-Ochir, T., Morris, B., et al. (2025) · IEEE Circuits and Systems Magazine · doi:10.1109/mcas.2024.3476008 · Cited by 32
The Evolution of Mixture of Experts: A Survey from Basics to Breakthroughs
Vats, A., Raja, R., Jain, V., & Chadha, A. (2024) · doi:10.20944/preprints202408.0583.v2 · Cited by 10
An Empirical Study of the Non-determinism of ChatGPT in Code Generation
Ouyang, S., Zhang, J. M., Harman, M., & Wang, M. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.02828
Metadata
- Authors
- Puigcerver, J., Riquelme, C., Mustafa, B., & Houlsby, N.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2308.00951
- OpenAlex
- W4385968027
- Cited by
- 36
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 2
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
- Keywords
- sparse mixture-of-experts, training stability, inference cost reduction, visual recognition, vision transformer, fine-tuning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
