Until this has been independently verified, I have my doubts. This wouldn’t be the first time for China to vastly exaggerate its technological capabilities.
Deepseek seems to have done a clever thing w.r.t. training data, by having the model train on data that was emitted by other LLMs (as far as I’ve heard). That means there is sort of “quality-pass”, filtering out a lot of the definitely bogus data. That probably leads to a smaller model, and thus less training hours.
Google engineers put out a paper on this technique recently as well.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@beehaw.org
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
The article mentions the cost of tokens to end users, not training time.
Ah ok, I didn’t catch that. Other articles were discussing v3’s training using only 2.8M GPU hours.
https://www.ft.com/content/c82933fe-be28-463b-8336-d71a2ff5bbbf
Until this has been independently verified, I have my doubts. This wouldn’t be the first time for China to vastly exaggerate its technological capabilities.
Deepseek seems to have done a clever thing w.r.t. training data, by having the model train on data that was emitted by other LLMs (as far as I’ve heard). That means there is sort of “quality-pass”, filtering out a lot of the definitely bogus data. That probably leads to a smaller model, and thus less training hours.
Google engineers put out a paper on this technique recently as well.