Skip to content

Non-record: PR703 + shard-order curriculum + GPTQ cache-backout (1.1171)#783

Open
petergpt wants to merge 1 commit intoopenai:mainfrom
petergpt:codex/pr703-curriculum-submit
Open

Non-record: PR703 + shard-order curriculum + GPTQ cache-backout (1.1171)#783
petergpt wants to merge 1 commit intoopenai:mainfrom
petergpt:codex/pr703-curriculum-submit

Conversation

@petergpt
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Summary

This PR adds a non-record 16MB submission built on the PR703-style quant/cache-backout branch with a score-ranked shard curriculum.

Submitted as non-record because:

  • it is a single-seed package
  • it does not clear the 0.005-nat record threshold required for leaderboard record promotion

Result

  • final_int6_sliding_window_exact = 1.11709895
  • final_int6_roundtrip_exact = 1.14068680
  • post_ema = 1.1368
  • step_stop = 6918
  • step_avg = 86.75ms
  • total submission size = 15,909,560
  • bytes under cap = 90,440

What changed relative to the forked PR703 base

The base PR703 local package was 1.11748714 at 15,963,300 bytes. This submission keeps the same general object class and mainly changes:

  1. score-ranked shard curriculum
  2. tighter final int6+lzma packing

This is an incremental optimization package, not a new frontier architecture claim.

Included files

  • README.md
  • submission.json
  • train.log
  • train_gpt.py
  • score_shards.py

Submission folder:

  • records/track_non_record_16mb/2026-03-25_PR703_Curriculum_Carryover_1.1171

@MatoTeziTanka
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Community Review — Non-record: PR703 + shard-order curriculum + GPTQ cache-backout (1.1171)

BPB: (not parsed — see PR title) | Compliance: LOOKS CLEAN — score-first-per-chunk TTT (legal #1416/#1423 pattern)

What I found in the code (head SHA 8b46c09972b3, file records/track_non_record_16mb/2026-03-25_PR703_Curriculum_Carryover_1.1171/train_gpt.py):

The TTT path at line 1183 implements the score-first-per-chunk pattern: each chunk is scored under torch.no_grad() / inference_mode() before the base_model.train() + SGD adaptation runs on that same chunk, with an is_last_chunk guard so the final chunk gets no adaptation pass. This is the structural shape the legal frontier uses (PRs #1416 erichroepke, #1423 aryanbhosale).

Per Issue #402 and Issue #677, TTT is legal when each token is scored before the adapter updates on it, and that's what the code does here — chunk ci is scored under weights adapted only on chunks 0..ci-1. No prequant_ttt_adapt_adamw(val_tokens, ...) multi-epoch fine-tune, no scored-region SLOT, no target-in-key n-gram cache.

CPU smoke test (CT2038 proteus-engine, 2026-04-11): import OK in 0.06s, dim=512, layers=11, vocab=1024, code=111257 B, SMOKE_TEST_PASS

Verdict: LOOKS CLEAN.

Recommendation to @cocohearts @valerio-oai @0hq @yuzhougu-oai @notapplica: MERGE pending standard checks (3-seed validation, 16MB artifact cap, 10-min wallclock on 8×H100 SXM). The compliance picture matches the legal reference frontier and no flags were raised by the classification pass.

Auto-classification caveat: this review was drafted by the AST-based classifier against a template derived from manually-reviewed cluster PRs (#1420, #1450, #1487, #1541, #1529, #1533, #1518). If I've misread a subtlety in your eval path — e.g., multi-epoch TTT that I mistook for single-pass, or a target-in-key lookup I missed in a helper function — please flag it and I'll re-run the audit manually.


Reviewed by @MatoTeziTankaThe Agora. CPU smoke test (CT2038 proteus-engine, 2026-04-11): import OK in 0.06s, dim=512, layers=11, vocab=1024, code=111257 B, SMOKE_TEST_PASS. Classification via deterministic AST-based classify_prs.py (pattern bank derived from ~65 manually-reviewed PRs earlier in the 2026-04-11 sweep). This review was auto-drafted from a template and spot-checked before posting — if the template misread your code, please call it out so I can iterate the classifier.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants