LLM Training and Architecture

Contents

Understanding the training methodologies and architectural designs of Large Language Models is essential for effectively leveraging them in educational applications. This section examines the multi-phase training process and compares key architectural approaches.

Training Process Overview

LLM training typically involves multiple phases, each contributing to the model's final capabilities. The training process requires extensive computational resources including efficient GPUs, TPUs, and sufficient memory, often taking weeks or months to complete.

LLM Training Pipeline

[Raw Text Data] → [Tokenization] → [Pre-training] → [Fine-tuning] → [RLHF Alignment] → [Deployed Model]

Phase 1: Pre-training (Unsupervised)

The first phase involves training on massive amounts of unlabeled text data. The model learns to predict the next token in a sequence (language modeling), identifying patterns, structures, and relationships in language. This phase typically uses Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) with backpropagation to update model parameters.

Training Data Sources

LLMs are trained on diverse information sources including Wikipedia, newspapers, documents, social media, and web content. Recognizing language patterns and relationships enables the models to complete tasks, participate in conversations, and write effectively.

Phase 2: Fine-tuning (Supervised)

Fine-tuning introduces domain-specific information and human feedback using labeled datasets. This phase adapts the pre-trained model for specific tasks such as sentiment analysis, question answering, or educational content generation. The process involves:

Phase 3: RLHF Alignment

Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) has become a critical phase for modern LLMs, particularly for conversational applications. This technique:

Architecture Types

GPT-3 (Autoregressive)

GPT-3 represents one of the most advanced autoregressive language models, developed by OpenAI with 175 billion parameters. Key architectural features include:

BERT (Bidirectional)

Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT), developed by Google, introduced bidirectional context understanding through two key training objectives:

Masked Language Modeling (MLM)

Randomly masks input tokens and trains the model to predict original tokens, enabling understanding of both past and future context simultaneously.

Next Sentence Prediction (NSP)

Analyzes whether a second sentence follows the first, improving understanding of inter-sentence relationships.

BERT training requires specialized hardware including Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs), Tensor Processing Units (TPUs), and Graphics Processing Units (GPUs).

XLNet (Permutation-Based)

XLNet addresses limitations of both autoregressive and bidirectional models through permutation-based training:

T5 (Text-to-Text)

Google's T5 model converts all NLP tasks into a unified text-to-text format:

CTRL (Conditional)

CTRL enables controlled text generation through user-defined control codes:

Detailed Model Comparison

Feature GPT-3 BERT XLNet T5
Architecture Decoder-only Transformer Encoder-only Transformer Permutation Transformer Encoder-Decoder
Training Objective Next token prediction MLM + NSP Permutation LM Text-to-text denoising
Context Direction Unidirectional (left-to-right) Bidirectional Bidirectional Bidirectional (encoder)
Parameters 175B 340M (large) 340M 11B (large)
Primary Strength Text generation, few-shot Classification, NLU Long-range dependencies Multi-task flexibility
Best For Education Content generation, tutoring Sentiment analysis, grading Complex reasoning tasks Question answering, summarization

Training Challenges

Challenge Description Mitigation Strategy
Computational Cost Training requires weeks/months with multiple GPUs/TPUs Cloud computing, model distillation, efficient architectures
Data Quality Training effectiveness depends on data quality and diversity Curated datasets, data cleaning, deduplication
Bias in Training Data Models inherit biases present in training corpora Diverse data sources, bias detection, RLHF alignment
Memory Requirements Large models require substantial GPU memory Gradient checkpointing, model parallelism, quantization
Reproducibility Large-scale training difficult to reproduce Open-source models, detailed documentation

Leading Research Teams

Institution Key Researchers Focus Area
OpenAI Research John Schulman [Scholar] RLHF, PPO algorithm, alignment
Google Brain Noam Shazeer [Scholar] Transformer architecture, scaling
DeepMind Oriol Vinyals [Scholar] Sequence-to-sequence, attention mechanisms
Meta AI Hugo Touvron [Scholar] LLaMA models, efficient training
Anthropic Chris Olah [Scholar] Constitutional AI, interpretability

Key Journals

Recent Developments (2024-2025)

Mixture of Experts (MoE) Architecture

The Mixture of Experts paradigm has emerged as a leading approach for scaling LLMs efficiently. This means that models can have more parameters without proportionally increasing compute costs. Specifically, Mistral AI's Mixtral 8x7B demonstrated that sparse activation—where only a subset of parameters are used for each token—enables models with larger total parameters while maintaining computational efficiency comparable to smaller dense models (Jiang et al., 2024).

Extended Context Windows

2024 saw significant advances in context length handling, which is critical for processing long documents in educational settings. For example, GPT-4 Turbo expanded to 128K tokens, Claude 3 models support 200K tokens, and Gemini 1.5 Pro achieved 1 million token context windows. Techniques like Rotary Position Embedding (RoPE) scaling enable these extended contexts without proportional memory increases (Gemini Team et al., 2024).

Direct Preference Optimization (DPO)

Direct Preference Optimization emerged as an alternative to RLHF that simplifies the alignment process. In other words, DPO eliminates the need for a separate reward model by directly optimizing the policy using preference data. This reduces computational complexity while maintaining alignment quality, making it more accessible for educational institutions to fine-tune models (Rafailov et al., 2023).

Multimodal Native Training

Google's Gemini models pioneered natively multimodal training—training on interleaved text, image, audio, and video from the start rather than adding modalities post-hoc. Because educational content often includes diagrams, charts, and multimedia, this approach enables more natural cross-modal understanding (Gemini Team et al., 2024).

Efficient Training Techniques

New training efficiency methods have reduced the computational burden of LLM development. This means that smaller research groups and educational institutions can now customize models:

Key 2024-2025 References

See Also

Educational Applications Insight

For educational settings, understanding these architectural differences helps in selecting appropriate models: GPT-based models excel at content generation and conversational tutoring, while BERT-based models are better suited for classification tasks like essay scoring and plagiarism detection. Recent advances in efficient fine-tuning (LoRA, QLoRA) make it more feasible for educational institutions to customize models for their specific curricula.

← Previous: History & Evolution | Next: Applications in Education →