File size: 5,099 Bytes
ae1e90a | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 | # God-Level Expert Architecture: Asymmetric MoE
## π― Philosophy: Size Where It Matters
**NOT**: Bigger model everywhere
**YES**: Surgical sizing for reasoning-heavy experts
---
## π Asymmetric Expert Sizing (Data-Driven)
### Tier 1: Reasoning Experts (50-60MB)
**Math Expert** (60MB)
- Multi-step chain reasoning
- Tool verification
- Step-by-step validation
- **Why 60MB**: Handles complex reasoning chains (GSM8K 95%+ target)
**Logic Expert** (60MB)
- Assumption tracking
- Implication chains
- Contradiction detection
- **Why 60MB**: Structure > lookup, needs depth
**Code Expert** (50MB)
- Pattern stability
- Schema enforcement
- Template following
- **Why 50MB**: Balance between patterns and constraints
### Tier 2: Standard Experts (20-30MB)
All others: QA, Grammar, Sentiment, NER, etc.
- **Why 20-30MB**: Pattern recognition sufficient
- No multi-step reasoning needed
- Diminishing returns beyond this
---
## π§ Architecture Changes
### Current (All ~1.26MB)
```
All experts: 331K params β 1.26MB
```
### Enhanced (Asymmetric)
```
Math: 15M params β 60MB (47x larger)
Logic: 15M params β 60MB (47x larger)
Code: 12M params β 50MB (39x larger)
Others: 5-7M params β 20-30MB (15-23x larger)
```
### Model Architecture for 60MB Expert
```python
MathExpert(
input_dim=256, # From shared encoder
hidden_dim=2048, # 8x larger (was 256)
num_layers=12, # 4x deeper (was 3)
dropout=0.1,
num_classes=1 # Binary validation
)
# Params: ~15M β 60MB
```
---
## π Training Strategy (CRITICAL)
### 1. Hard Curriculum Learning
```
Week 1: Easy (basic ops, single-step)
Week 2: Medium (2-3 steps, simple chains)
Week 3: Hard (multi-step, edge cases)
Week 4: Adversarial (failures, near-misses)
```
### 2. Failure-Driven Training
**Include in datasets**:
- β Wrong solutions (with corrections)
- β Near-misses (subtle bugs)
- β Incorrect proofs (with refutations)
- β Off-by-one errors
**Why**: Experts learn MORE from failures than perfection
### 3. Output Schemas (Non-Negotiable)
**Math Expert Schema**:
```json
{
"tool_used": "calculator|cas|python",
"tool_result": "56088",
"verification": "correct|incorrect",
"explanation": "brief step outline",
"confidence": 0.95
}
```
**Logic Expert Schema**:
```json
{
"premises": ["A", "B"],
"inference": "C",
"conclusion": "valid|invalid",
"reasoning": "step-by-step",
"confidence": 0.92
}
```
**Code Expert Schema**:
```json
{
"code": "def foo(): ...",
"language": "python",
"follows_template": true,
"explanation": null, // NO PROSE
"confidence": 0.88
}
```
### 4. Refusal Training (THE SECRET)
**God-level = knowing when NOT to answer**
Train on:
```
Q: "Prove Riemann hypothesis"
A: "REFUSE: Requires specialist mathematician, not computable"
Q: "Calculate 123456789 * 987654321"
A: "TOOL: Delegating to calculator [result: 121932631112635269]"
Q: "Is this proof valid? [complex logic]"
A: "UNCERTAIN: Requires formal verification tool"
```
---
## π Tool-First Architecture (Math Example)
```
User: "Calculate 123 * 456"
β
Router: MATH_CALC detected
β
Calculator Tool: 56088
β
Math Expert: {
"tool_used": "calculator",
"result": "56088",
"verification": "correct",
"confidence": 1.0
}
β
Output: "The answer is 56088"
```
**Math expert NEVER computes, only verifies/explains**
---
## π Expected Performance (Benchmarked)
| Expert | Size | Target Accuracy | Benchmark |
|--------|------|----------------|-----------|
| Math | 60MB | 95%+ | GSM8K-like |
| Logic | 60MB | 90%+ | Logical reasoning |
| Code | 50MB | 85%+ | HumanEval-style |
| Grammar | 25MB | 80%+ | CoLA |
| Others | 20-30MB | 70%+ | Domain-specific |
---
## β οΈ What NOT to Do
β **Don't increase mother model** (keep OLMoE sparse)
β **Don't overlap responsibilities** (specialization key)
β **Don't trust LLM math** (always tool-first)
β **Don't let experts ramble** (schemas enforce)
β **Don't train on perfect data only** (failures teach more)
---
## π Implementation Plan
### Phase 1: Resize Key Experts
1. Math Expert: 1.26MB β 60MB
2. Logic Expert: 1.26MB β 60MB
3. Code Expert: 1.26MB β 50MB
### Phase 2: Enhanced Training
1. Curriculum datasets (easy β hard)
2. Failure examples (wrong β correct)
3. Output schema enforcement
4. Refusal training
### Phase 3: Tool Integration
1. Math β Calculator/CAS first
2. Logic β Expert only (high confidence)
3. Code β Schema + templates
### Phase 4: Validation
1. GSM8K-style math eval (95%+ target)
2. Logic reasoning tests (90%+ target)
3. Code generation (85%+ target)
---
## π‘ The Real Secret
**God-level behavior = Architecture + Discipline + Refusal**
NOT just bigger models.
You already have:
- β
Right architecture (hybrid MoE)
- β
Right router (ISL-based)
- β
Right discipline (task contracts)
Now add:
- π Asymmetric sizing (surgical)
- π Curriculum training (hard)
- π‘οΈ Refusal training (intelligent)
**This is how you build god-level experts on CPU.** π§ π₯
|