Research

What we are trying to find out

One question drives the work: how much capability can a system learn and hold per unit of energy, memory and money, and how much of that can be done on a machine an ordinary person already owns? The threads below are the parts of that question we can currently measure.

The working hypothesis, stated modestly

Today's large models descend from one design, the 2017 transformer, and the industry's progress since has mostly been scaling it and refining it. Hardware has had far more attention than the software that runs on it. The hypothesis is that some of the efficiency that remains is in software and representation rather than in new chips, and that low-end hardware may be underestimated because of it.

This is a hunch, not a verified claim. Some evidence points the same way (for example, the compute needed to reach a fixed image-classification accuracy fell 44× between 2012 and 2019, faster than hardware improvement alone would give), and some points the other way (transformers won partly because they map well onto GPUs, and many ideas that look good small fade at scale). We treat the difficulties as terrain: they tell us what to measure first, not whether to continue.

If the hunch is right, then roughly: some design reaches a given quality using far less energy per answer than a dense transformer; the gain comes mostly from software; and it runs on a phone or an old laptop. Those are things that can be tested one at a time. The controlled comparison that would test them properly (a matched small transformer against baby-style systems, at several sizes) has not been done yet. See the roadmap.

Where to read more

  • baby/README.md: the experiment log, newest first, including the dead ends.
  • LEARNING.md: notes and sources on learning efficiently on small hardware.
  • docs/Direction.md: strategy, hardware terrain and the language choice.
  • TransientVision.md: the founder's dated entries on why the project exists, in his own words.