3 ms·
Is it even feasible any time soon to train an LLM on all of YouTube?
by macrolime 4y ago
Is it even feasible any time soon to train an LLM on all of YouTube?
- danielbln 4y agoNapkin math, assuming around 156 million hours of video on all of Youtube: 156 million hours of YouTube videos 9,000 words/hour 6 characters/word (including space) First, let's find out the total number of characters: 9,000 words/hour \* 6 characters/word = 54,000 characters/hour Now, let's calculate the total number of characters for 156 million hours of YouTube videos: 54,000 characters/hour \* 156,000,000 hours = 8,424,000,000,000 characters Since 1 character is typically 1 byte, we can convert this to gigabytes: 8,424,000,000,000 bytes / (1024 \* 1024 \* 1024) ≈ 7,842.11 GB So, 8TB of text? Seems doable.
- macrolime 4y agoI mean the actual video, that's much bigger With a vision transformer each token may be around 16x16 pixels. I found an example where they use images of resolution 224x224 for training a vision transformer so if we go with that that 256 pixels per token and 50176 pixels per image, so 196 tokens per frame, 24 frames per second, that's 4704 tokens per second or 16934400 token / hour. In total we're at 2.6x10^15 tokens. GPT-3 was trained on 5x10^11 tokens, so YouTube done this way would be around four orders of magnitude more tokens that GPT-3 was trained on. GPT-3 was undertrained by 1-2 orders of magnitude, so the compute required to trained a model on YouTube would then be around 6 orders of magnitude higher than what was used to train GPT-3, so about one million times more. I did a linear regression on the training costs from cerebras(1) and came up with the formula (1901.67366*X)-197902.72715 where X is number of tokens in billions. Plugging in 5x10^15 tokens we get a training cost of 5 billion dollars. I guess a lot of optimizations could be done that would decrease the cost, so maybe its doable in a few years. 1. https://cirrascale.com/cerebras.php https://cirrascale.com/cerebras.php