Daily Papers

Adaptive optimizers such as Adam and AdamW apply the same update rule regardless of whether training is in a chaotic early phase or near convergence. We introduce PsiLogic, an optimizer that augments Adam with a dynamic Active Cancellation Term gated by a dual exponential moving average (EMA) of scale-normalized gradient norms. The resulting chaos detector strengthens damping when gradient statistics are unstable and fades to zero as training stabilizes, providing an implicit warmup without a hand-tuned schedule. We evaluate PsiLogic against Adam, AdamW, and Lion using FairBench -- a reproducible benchmark protocol with per-optimizer learning-rate sweeps, identical initialization per seed, and Welch t-tests. On an NVIDIA H100 80GB reference run (4 arenas, 3 seeds, 2000 steps, bf16 AMP), PsiLogic achieves the best validation metric in three of four arenas: NLP perplexity 7.79 +/- 0.18 vs. 8.17 +/- 0.08 (AdamW, p = 0.049), ViT top-1 accuracy 0.244 +/- 0.006 vs. 0.223 +/- 0.002 (AdamW, p = 0.015), and ResNet top-1 accuracy 0.222 +/- 0.001 vs. 0.172 +/- 0.004 (Adam, p = 0.001). On diffusion, validation MSE is statistically tied with Adam/AdamW (p = 0.49). ResNet accuracy vs. AdamW is a numerical tie without significance at three seeds (p = 0.44). Peak GPU memory is comparable across optimizers; PsiLogic incurs 1.2--1.8x wall-clock overhead on transformer-heavy arenas (implementation-bound). We release an open-source PyTorch implementation, the full FairBench harness, and all raw CSV outputs to support independent verification.

Tensor Cores have been an important unit to accelerate Fused Matrix Multiplication Accumulation (MMA) in all NVIDIA GPUs since Volta Architecture. To program Tensor Cores, users have to use either legacy wmma APIs or current mma APIs. Legacy wmma APIs are more easy-to-use but can only exploit limited features and power of Tensor Cores. Specifically, wmma APIs support fewer operand shapes and can not leverage the new sparse matrix multiplication feature of the newest Ampere Tensor Cores. However, the performance of current programming interface has not been well explored. Furthermore, the computation numeric behaviors of low-precision floating points (TF32, BF16, and FP16) supported by the newest Ampere Tensor Cores are also mysterious. In this paper, we explore the throughput and latency of current programming APIs. We also intuitively study the numeric behaviors of Tensor Cores MMA and profile the intermediate operations including multiplication, addition of inner product, and accumulation. All codes used in this work can be found in https://github.com/sunlex0717/DissectingTensorCores.

Production machine learning (ML) stacks often split graph compilation and kernel execution across different layers and languages, making backend behavior, deployment guarantees, and performance fallbacks hard to reason about end-to-end. RLX addresses this gap with a single Rust codebase that combines compiler and runtime roles around one primitive-level, three-level intermediate representation (IR), plus a transparent dispatch contract that resolves each operator to native, common-IR, or rewritten lowering and fails compilation when legalization is not possible. The same IR targets fourteen runtime devices (cpu, metal, mlx, ane, cuda, rocm, oneapi, tpu, hexagon, gpu, vulkan, opengl, directx, webgpu) and two specialty codegen paths (Cortex-M INT8 and FPGA), ingests safetensors, GGUF, ONNX, and rten formats, supports F16/BF16/F64/C64 and quantized INT4/INT8 flows with AMP/PTQ/QAT, and scales via tensor-/pipeline-parallel collectives over TCP and RDMA transports. Beyond neural workloads, RLX also extends to scientific/physics-style domains through sparse and dense linear algebra extensions (e.g., CSR LU/CG/matvec and LAPACK- backed factorizations) and 3D Gaussian splatting operators. We evaluate RLX against PyTorch, TensorFlow, JAX, candle, burn, tch, rten, MLX, CoreML, IREE, Glow, TensorRT, and tinygrad under identical input generation and p50 measurement methodology on one host. On all-MiniLM-L6-v2, RLX-Metal is fastest at every batch (e.g., 16.6 ms at batch 32 vs. PyTorch-MPS 26.7 ms). In the MNIST training table, RLX also has the top-throughput entry (graph-fused MLP: 946,487 img/s), above NumPy+BLAS (787,349 img/s), while retaining 100% top-1 parity on reference checks (e.g., Qwen3).

Physical AI systems, including robots, autonomous vehicles, embodied agents and edge copilots, often run a different inference workload from cloud LLM serving: single-stream, batch-1 autoregressive decode, where one robot, camera feed or user session waits on the next token. This workload is usually described as memory-bandwidth-bound. Each decode step streams model weights and the active KV cache, so latency should scale with peak HBM bandwidth. We show that this account is true but incomplete. We measure batch-1 decode for three 7 to 8B-class GQA transformers across four NVIDIA GPUs: H100 SXM5, A100-80GB SXM4, L40S and L4. We evaluate context lengths from 2048 to 16384, producing 44 valid cells under a controlled bf16 SDPA setup. The achieved fraction of peak HBM bandwidth falls as peak bandwidth rises. On the headline Qwen-2.5-7B ctx=2048 cell, an L4 reaches roughly 81 percent of its analytic memory floor, while an H100 reaches only 27 percent. Physical-AI decode is memory-dominated, but faster memory does not translate into proportional latency gains. We test the missing term with a CUDA Graphs A/B experiment. On H100 at ctx=2048, CUDA Graphs improves decode latency by 1.259x across N=10 fresh sessions, with a 95 percent bootstrap confidence interval of 1.253 to 1.267. On L4, the same intervention gives only 1.028x. This isolates a launch-side overhead that becomes visible on fast GPUs but remains mostly hidden on slower, bandwidth-bound GPUs. The deployment implication is that memory savings matter only when the runtime realises them. On L4, bf16 decode sits close to the memory floor, but common quantised paths do not recover the expected 4x weight-traffic reduction: bnb-nf4 reaches 59.36 ms/step and AutoAWQ+Marlin reaches 45.24 ms/step from a 62.32 ms bf16 baseline. GPTQ+ExLlamaV2, with Ada-tuned int4 kernels, reaches 17.36 ms/step.

Fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) with parameter-efficient techniques such as LoRA and QLoRA has enabled adaptation of foundation models on modest hardware. Yet the efficiency of such training on consumer-grade GPUs, especially under strict 8 GB VRAM limits, remains underexplored. We present a controlled profiling study of LoRA/QLoRA fine-tuning using the Qwen2.5-1.5B-Instruct model on a single NVIDIA RTX 4060. Across three representative configurations, we systematically vary batch size, sequence length, optimizer choice (AdamW vs. PagedAdamW), and precision (fp16 vs. bf16). We report throughput (tokens/s), time per 10k tokens, and VRAM footprint, alongside energy estimates derived from GPU board power limits. Our results show that paged optimizers improve throughput by up to 25% (628 tok/s vs. 500 tok/s baseline), while bf16 degrades efficiency relative to fp16. Despite 8 GB constraints, sequence lengths up to 2048 tokens were feasible using parameter-efficient strategies. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic case study of LLM fine- tuning efficiency on consumer GPUs, providing reproducible benchmarks and practical guidelines for resource-constrained researchers and practitioners.

Asynchronous rollout improves the efficiency of reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) by reducing under-utilization during long-tail generation. Sustained concurrency also concentrates context processing into fewer decode steps, increasing the KV workload per step. We characterize this KV concentration and find that KV cache quantization delivers substantially greater acceleration than weight-only and weight-activation quantization in our matched-workload comparisons. However, INT4 KV rollout can degrade learning even with token-level truncated importance sampling (TIS). We propose KV4-RL, which combines calibration-free INT4 KV quantization with selective INT8 protection of attention sinks and recent context. Protecting a bounded number of positions reduces sampler mismatch while retaining most of the speedup from INT4. Across 400 iterations of Qwen3-8B-Base GRPO training, KV4-RL achieves 1.80times cumulative rollout speedup and 1.27times cumulative full-iteration speedup over BF16 rollout, reaching 1.97times rollout speedup over the final 50 iterations. Under a common BF16 evaluator, its final six-benchmark mean accuracy is within 0.5 percentage points of BF16-rollout training for both Qwen3-4B-Base and Qwen3-8B-Base.