olive quantization added

src/routes/blogs/olive-quant-ft/+page.svx

@@ -0,0 +1,196 @@
+---
+title: 'Is it better to quantize before or after finetuning?'
+date: '18th November, 2024'
+description: 'Learn how to use the shared cache feature in Olive to enhance team collaboration when optimizing AI models'
+keywords: 'GenAI , LLM, ONNXRuntime, ORT, Phi, DirectML, Windows, phi3, phi-3, llama-3.2, ONNX, SLM, edge, gpu'
+authors:
+  [
+    'Jambay Kinley',
+    'Sam Kemp'
+    ]
+authorsLink:
+  [
+    'https://www.linkedin.com/in/jambayk/',
+    'https://www.linkedin.com/in/samuel-kemp-a9253724/'
+   ]
+image: ''
+imageSquare: ''
+url: 'https://onnxruntime.ai/blogs/olive-quant-ft'
+---
+
+
+## 👋 Introduction
+
+Quantization in machine learning is a technique used to reduce the precision of the numbers used in computations, which helps in making models more efficient. Instead of using high-precision floating point numbers (like 32-bit or 16-bit), quantization converts these numbers to lower-precision formats, such as 8-bit integers. The primary benefits of quantization are a smaller model size and faster computations, which are particularly useful for deploying models on devices with limited resources, like mobile phones or embedded systems. However, this reduction in precision can sometimes lead to a slight decrease in the model's accuracy.
+
+Fine-tuning an AI model using the LoRA (Low-Rank Adaptation) method is an efficient way to adapt large language models to specific tasks or domains. Instead of retraining all the model parameters, LoRA modifies the fine-tuning process by freezing the original model weights and applying changes to a separate set of weights, which are then added to the original parameters. This approach transforms the model parameters into a lower-rank dimension, reducing the number of parameters that need training, thus speeding up the process and lowering costs.
+
+When fine-tuning and quantizing a model, it is important to establish the correct sequence:
+
+- Is it better to quantize *before* fine-tuning or after?
+
+In theory, quantizing before fine-tuning should yield a higher quality model because it provides an opportunity for the fine-tuning process to recover some of the loss from the quantization process. In this blog post we demonstrate how Olive - a state-of-the-art model optimization toolkit for the ONNX runtime - can help you answer when to quantize and which quantization algorithm to use for a given model architecture and scenario.
+
+Also, as part of answering the question of when to quantize we'll show how the following different quantization *algorithms* impact accuracy:
+
+- **Activation-Aware Weight Quantization (AWQ)** is a technique designed to optimise large language models (LLMs) for efficient execution. AWQ quantizes the weights of a model by considering the activations produced during inference. This means that the quantization process takes into account the actual data distribution in the activations, leading to better preservation of model accuracy compared to traditional weight quantization methods
+- **Generalized Post-Training Quantization (GPTQ)** is a post-training quantization technique designed for Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) models. It quantizes the weights of the model to lower bitwidths, such as 4-bit integers, to reduce memory usage and computational requirements without significantly impacting the model's accuracy. This technique quantizes each row of the weight matrix independently to find a version of the weights that minimizes error
+
+
+## ⚗️ Running the experiment with Olive
+
+To answer our question on the right sequencing of quantization and fine-tuning we leveraged Olive (ONNX Live) - an advanced model optimization toolkit designed to streamline the process of optimizing AI models for deployment with the ONNX runtime.
+
+### 1. 💾 Install Olive
+
+We installed the [Olive CLI](../blogs/olive-cli) using `pip`:
+
+<pre><code>pip install olive-ai[quantize,finetuning]
+</code></pre>
+
+### 2. 🗜️ Quantize
+
+We quantize Phi-3.5-mini-instruct using both the AWQ and GPTQ algorithms with the following Olive commands:
+
+<pre><code># AWQ Quantization
+olive quantize \
+  --algorithm awq \
+  --model_name_or_path microsoft/Phi-3.5-mini-instruct \
+  --output_path models/phi-awq
+
+# GPTQ Quantization
+olive quantize \
+  --algorithm gptq \
+  --model_name_or_path microsoft/Phi-3.5-mini-instruct \
+  --data_name wikitext \
+  --subset wikitext-2-raw-v1 \
+  --split train \
+  --max_samples 128 \
+  --output_path models/phi-gptq 
+</code></pre>
+
+### 3. 🎚️ Fine-tune
+
+We fine-tune *the quantized models* using the following Olive commands:
+
+<pre><code># Finetune AWQ model
+olive finetune \
+  --model_name_or_path models/phi-awq \
+  --data_name nampdn-ai/tiny-codes \
+  --train_split "train[:4096]" \
+  --eval_split "train[4096:4224]" \
+  --text_template "### Language: &lbrace;programming_language&rbrace; \n### Question: &lbrace;prompt&rbrace; \n### Answer: &lbrace;response&rbrace;" \
+  --per_device_train_batch_size 16 \
+  --per_device_eval_batch_size 16 \
+  --max_steps 100 \
+  --logging_steps 25 \
+  --output_path models/phi-awq-ft
+
+# Finetune GPTQ model
+olive finetune \
+  --model_name_or_path models/phi-gptq \
+  --data_name nampdn-ai/tiny-codes \
+  --train_split "train[:4096]" \
+  --eval_split "train[4096:4224]" \
+  --text_template "### Language: &lbrace;programming_language&rbrace; \n### Question: &lbrace;prompt&rbrace; \n### Answer: &lbrace;response&rbrace;" \
+  --per_device_train_batch_size 16 \
+  --per_device_eval_batch_size 16 \
+  --max_steps 100 \
+  --logging_steps 25 \
+  --output_path models/phi-gptq-ft
+</code></pre>
+
+> **Note**: We also did the reverse sequence where we Fine-tuned first and then ran quantization. They are the same commands but in a different order.
+
+### 4. 🎯 Run perplexity
+
+We ran a [perplexity metrics](https://huggingface.co/docs/transformers/perplexity) on the models using Olive. First, we defined the following Olive configuration in a file called `perplexity-config.yaml`, which uses Olive's evaluation feature:
+
+<pre><code>input_model:
+  type: HfModel
+  model_path: models/phi-awq-pt/model
+  adapter_path: models/phi-awq-pt/adapter
+systems:
+  local_system:
+    type: LocalSystem
+    accelerators:
+      - device: gpu
+        execution_providers:
+          - CUDAExecutionProvider
+data_configs:
+  - name: tinycodes_ppl
+    type: HuggingfaceContainer
+    load_dataset_config:
+      data_name: nampdn-ai/tiny-codes
+      split: 'train[5000:6000]'
+    pre_process_data_config:
+      text_template: |-
+        ### Language: &lbrace;programming_language&rbrace;
+        ### Question: &lbrace;prompt&rbrace;
+        ### Answer: &lbrace;response&rbrace;
+      strategy: line-by-line
+      max_seq_len: 1024
+    dataloader_config:
+      batch_size: 8
+evaluators:
+  common_evaluator:
+    metrics:
+      - name: tinycodes_ppl
+        type: accuracy
+        sub_types:
+          - name: perplexity
+        data_config: tinycodes_ppl
+passes: &lbrace;&rbrace;
+auto_optimizer_config:
+  disable_auto_optimizer: true
+evaluator: common_evaluator
+host: local_system
+target: local_system
+output_dir: models/eval
+</code></pre>
+
+> **Note**: We define the same configurations for the other models but updated the `input_model`.
+
+We then executed the Olive configuration using:
+
+<pre><code>olive run perplexity-config.yaml</code></pre>
+
+## 📊 Results
+
+### Phi-3.5-Mini-Instruct
+
+The chart below shows the perplexity metrics for the:
+
+1. Different Quantization and Fine-tuning sequences (magenta) 
+1. Phi-3.5-Mini-Instruct base model (dashed green line), which is not quantized
+1. Phi-3.5-Mini-Instruct Fine-tuned model (solid green line), which is not quantized
+
+<div class="m-aut w60">
+<img src="./perplex-phi.png" alt="Perplexity metrics for Phi-3.5">
+
+The goal is for the quantized models to be as close to the fine-tuned model (solid green line) as possible. There are several takeaways:
+
+- Quantization does not have a significant impact on the model quality - as seen by the closeness of the perplexity scores for quantized models to the fine-tuned base model.
+- Quantizing *before* fine-tuning does give better results than quantizing after finetuning.
+- GPTQ provides better accuracy in this scenario than AWQ.
+
+### Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct
+
+The chart below shows the perplexity metrics for the:
+
+1. Different Quantization and Fine-tuning sequences (blue) 
+1. Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct base model (dashed green line), which is not quantized
+1. Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct Fine-tuned model (solid green line), which is not quantized
+
+<div class="m-aut w60">
+<img src="./perplex-llama.png" alt="Perplexity metrics for Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct">
+
+The goal is for the quantized models to be as close to the fine-tuned model (solid green line) as possible. There are several takeaways:
+
+- Quantization does not have a significant impact on the model quality - as seen by the closeness of the perplexity scores for quantized models to the fine-tuned base model.
+- Quantizing *before* fine-tuning does give better results than quantizing after finetuning.
+- GPTQ and AWQ give similar model quality results.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+In this blog post, we demonstrated how we utilised Olive to address common AI model optimisation queries. Our findings revealed that quantizing before fine-tuning significantly enhances model quality for both Phi-3.5-mini-instruct and Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct. These quantied variants closely match the quality of their full precision (FP32) counterparts, while requiring less memory and storage. This underscores the potential for on-device AI to deliver high-quality performance with a reduced resource footprint.