PreprintCited by 15Topic ModelingNatural Language Processing TechniquesSoftware Engineering Research

Better & Faster Large Language Models via Multi-token Prediction

Open access
Gloeckle, Fabian, Idrissi, Badr Youbi, Rozière, Baptiste, Lopez-Paz, David, Synnaeve, Gabriel·2024·arXiv

Abstract

Large language models such as GPT and Llama are trained with a next-token prediction loss. In this work, we suggest that training language models to predict multiple future tokens at once results in higher sample efficiency. More specifically, at each position in the training corpus, we ask the model to predict the following n tokens using n independent output heads, operating on top of a shared model trunk. Considering multi-token prediction as an auxiliary training task, we measure improved downstream capabilities with no overhead in training time for both code and natural language models. The method is increasingly useful for larger model sizes, and keeps its appeal when training for multiple epochs. Gains are especially pronounced on generative benchmarks like coding, where our models consistently outperform strong baselines by several percentage points. Our 13B parameter models solves 12 % more problems on HumanEval and 17 % more on MBPP than comparable next-token models. Experiments on small algorithmic tasks demonstrate that multi-token prediction is favorable for the development of induction heads and algorithmic reasoning capabilities. As an additional benefit, models trained with 4-token prediction are up to 3 times faster at inference, even with large batch sizes.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2404.19737

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Jacob Austin, Augustus Odena, Maxwell Nye, Maarten Bosma, Henryk Michalewski, David Dohan, Ellen Jiang, Carrie Cai, Michael Terry, Quoc Le, et al. Program synthesis with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.07732, 2021. · arXiv
  2. Mark Chen, Jerry Tworek, Heewoo Jun, Qiming Yuan, Hen- rique Ponde, Jared Kaplan, Harri Edwards, Yura Burda, Nicholas Joseph, Greg Brockman, et al. Evaluating large language models trained on code. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.03374, 2021. · arXiv
  3. Nakhun Chumpolsathien. Using knowledge distillation from keyword extraction to improve the informativeness of neu- ral cross-lingual summarization. Master's thesis, Beijing Institute of Technology, 2020.
  4. Karl Cobbe, Vineet Kosaraju, Mohammad Bavarian, Mark Chen, Heewoo Jun, Lukasz Kaiser, Matthias Plappert, Jerry Tworek, Jacob Hilton, Reiichiro Nakano, et al. Training verifiers to solve math word problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.14168, 2021. · arXiv
  5. Li Dong, Nan Yang, Wenhui Wang, Furu Wei, Xiaodong Liu, Yu Wang, Jianfeng Gao, Ming Zhou, and Hsiao-Wuen Hon. Unified language model pre-training for natural lan- guage understanding and generation. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pages 13063-13075, 2019.
  6. Alexandre Défossez, Jade Copet, Gabriel Synnaeve, and Yossi Adi. High fidelity neural audio compression. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.13438, 2022. · arXiv
  7. Mehrdad Farahani, Mohammad Gharachorloo, and Moham- mad Manthouri. Leveraging parsbert and pretrained mt5 for persian abstractive text summarization. In 2021 26th International Computer Conference, Computer Society of Iran (CSICC). IEEE, March 2021. doi: 10.1109/ csicc52343.2021.9420563. URL http://dx.doi. org/10.1109/CSICC52343.2021.9420563. · DOI
  8. Bogdan Gliwa, Iwona Mochol, Maciej Biesek, and Alek- sander Wawer. Samsum corpus: A human-annotated dialogue dataset for abstractive summarization. In Pro- ceedings of the 2nd Workshop on New Frontiers in Summarization. Association for Computational Linguis- tics, 2019. doi: 10.18653/v1/d19-5409. URL http: //dx.doi.org/10.18653/v1/D19-5409. · DOI · Paper page
  9. Dan Hendrycks, Steven Basart, Saurav Kadavath, Mantas Mazeika, Akul Arora, Ethan Guo, Collin Burns, Samir Puranik, Horace He, Dawn Song, et al. Measuring cod- ing challenge competence with apps. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.09938, 2021. · arXiv
  10. Diederik Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. ICLR, 2015.
  11. Ryan Koo, Minhwa Lee, Vipul Raheja, Jong Inn Park, Zae Myung Kim, and Dongyeop Kang. Benchmarking cognitive biases in large language models as evaluators. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.17012, 2023. · arXiv
  12. Tom Kwiatkowski, Jennimaria Palomaki, Olivia Redfield, Michael Collins, Ankur Parikh, Chris Alberti, Danielle Epstein, Illia Polosukhin, Matthew Kelcey, Jacob Devlin, Kenton Lee, Kristina N. Toutanova, Llion Jones, Ming- Wei Chang, Andrew Dai, Jakob Uszkoreit, Quoc Le, and Slav Petrov. Natural questions: a benchmark for question answering research. Transactions of the Association of Computational Linguistics, 2019.
  13. Yann LeCun. A path towards autonomous machine intelli- gence version 0.9. 2, 2022-06-27. Open Review, 62(1), 2022.
  14. Yujia Li, David Choi, Junyoung Chung, Nate Kush- man, Julian Schrittwieser, Rémi Leblond, Tom Eccles, James Keeling, Felix Gimeno, Agustin Dal Lago, et al. Competition-level code generation with alphacode. Sci- ence, 378(6624):1092-1097, 2022.
  15. Chin-Yew Lin. ROUGE: A package for automatic evalu- ation of summaries. In Text Summarization Branches Out, pages 74-81, Barcelona, Spain, July 2004. Asso- ciation for Computational Linguistics. URL https: //aclanthology.org/W04-1013.
  16. Jesse Read, Bernhard Pfahringer, Geoffrey Holmes, and Eibe Frank. Classifier chains: A review and perspectives. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 70:683-718, 2021.
  17. Melissa Roemmele, Cosmin Adrian Bejan, and Andrew S Gordon. Choice of plausible alternatives: An evaluation of commonsense causal reasoning. In 2011 AAAI Spring Symposium Series, 2011.
  18. David Silver, Aja Huang, Chris J Maddison, Arthur Guez, Laurent Sifre, George Van Den Driessche, Julian Schrit- twieser, Ioannis Antonoglou, Veda Panneershelvam, Marc Lanctot, et al. Mastering the game of go with deep neural networks and tree search. nature, 529(7587): 484-489, 2016.
  19. Aaditya K Singh, Stephanie CY Chan, Ted Moskovitz, Erin Grant, Andrew M Saxe, and Felix Hill. The transient nature of emergent in-context learning in transformers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.08360, 2023. · arXiv
  20. Yi Tay, Mostafa Dehghani, Vinh Q Tran, Xavier Gar- cia, Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Hyung Won Chung, Sia- mak Shakeri, Dara Bahri, Tal Schuster, et al. Ul2: Unifying language learning paradigms. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.05131, 2022. · arXiv
  21. Vladimir Vapnik and Akshay Vashist. A new learning paradigm: Learning using privileged information. Neural networks, 22(5-6):544-557, 2009.
  22. Vikas Yadav, Steven Bethard, and Mihai Surdeanu. Quick and (not so) dirty: Unsupervised selection of justifica- tion sentences for multi-hop question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.07176, 2019. · arXiv
  23. Zhilin Yang, Zihang Dai, Yiming Yang, Jaime Carbonell, Russ R Salakhutdinov, and Quoc V Le. Xlnet: Gen- eralized autoregressive pretraining for language under- standing. In Advances in neural information processing systems, pages 5753-5763, 2019.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gloeckle, F., Idrissi, B. Y., Rozière, B., Lopez-Paz, D., & Synnaeve, G.
Affiliations
  • École nationale des ponts et chaussées (FR)
  • Université Paris-Saclay (FR)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4396821494
Cited by
15
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
Keywords
multi-token prediction, next-token prediction, large language models, sample efficiency, code generation, algorithmic reasoning, induction heads, inference speed, HumanEval, MBPP

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