REVIEW 1 cited by
Solving Token Gradient Conflict in Mixture-of-Experts for Large Vision-Language Model
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
The Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) has gained increasing attention in studying Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs). It uses a sparse model to replace the dense model, achieving comparable performance while activating fewer parameters during inference, thus significantly reducing the inference cost. Existing MoE methods in LVLM encourage different experts to specialize in different tokens, and they usually employ a router to predict the routing of each token. However, the router is not optimized concerning distinct parameter optimization directions generated from tokens within an expert. This may lead to severe interference between tokens within an expert. To address this problem, we propose to use the token-level gradient analysis to Solving Token Gradient Conflict (STGC) in this paper. Specifically, we first use token-level gradients to identify conflicting tokens in experts. After that, we add a regularization loss tailored to encourage conflicting tokens routing from their current experts to other experts, for reducing interference between tokens within an expert. Our method can serve as a plug-in for diverse LVLM methods, and extensive experimental results demonstrate its effectiveness. The code will be publicly available at https://github.com/longrongyang/STGC.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Ensembles of Low-Rank Expert Adapters
ELREA clusters instruction-tuning data by gradient direction, trains one LoRA expert per cluster, and routes new instructions to experts via gradient similarity, giving modest benchmark gains over full-data LoRA.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.