Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Kushal Tirumala

dblp:276/0937 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
8ranked-venue papers
2as first author
8since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 8 · 2 first-author · 8 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
7 papers
Generative modeling · 33% Efficient and distributed learning · 29% Language models and text generation · 20%
Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Image and video coding · 100%

Topics — the 23 heaviest of 23, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Generative modeling
autoregressive model
0.912025
When Worse is Better: Navigating the Compression Generation Trade-off In Visual Tokenization · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Generative modeling
diffusion model
0.912025
Transfusion: Predict the Next Token and Diffuse Images with One Multi-Modal Model · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Generative modeling
image generation
0.912025
When Worse is Better: Navigating the Compression Generation Trade-off In Visual Tokenization · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Generative modeling
image tokenization
0.912025
When Worse is Better: Navigating the Compression Generation Trade-off In Visual Tokenization · NeurIPS 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model
0.912025
The Unreasonable Ineffectiveness of the Deeper Layers · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › model compression › pruning › structured pruning
layer pruning
0.912025
The Unreasonable Ineffectiveness of the Deeper Layers · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
model compression
0.912025
The Unreasonable Ineffectiveness of the Deeper Layers · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Generative modeling › multimodal generation
multimodal generative model
0.912025
Transfusion: Predict the Next Token and Diffuse Images with One Multi-Modal Model · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › multimodal deep learning
multimodal model training
0.912025
Transfusion: Predict the Next Token and Diffuse Images with One Multi-Modal Model · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Generative modeling › autoregressive model
next-token prediction
0.912025
Transfusion: Predict the Next Token and Diffuse Images with One Multi-Modal Model · ICLR 2025
Image and video coding
image compression
0.912025
When Worse is Better: Navigating the Compression Generation Trade-off In Visual Tokenization · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
data-efficient learning
0.812024
Effective pruning of web-scale datasets based on complexity of concept clusters · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › data selection
data pruning
0.812024
Effective pruning of web-scale datasets based on complexity of concept clusters · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
data selection
0.712023
D4: Improving LLM Pretraining via Document De-Duplication and Diversification · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › data curation
deduplication
0.712023
D4: Improving LLM Pretraining via Document De-Duplication and Diversification · NeurIPS 2023
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model training
language model pretraining
0.712023
D4: Improving LLM Pretraining via Document De-Duplication and Diversification · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization
0.612022
Investigating Generalization by Controlling Normalized Margin · ICML 2022
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization bounds
0.612022
Investigating Generalization by Controlling Normalized Margin · ICML 2022
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model training
large language model training dynamics
0.612022
Memorization Without Overfitting: Analyzing the Training Dynamics of Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Learning theory › generalization
margin-based generalization
0.612022
Investigating Generalization by Controlling Normalized Margin · ICML 2022
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model › knowledge in language models
memorization
0.612022
Memorization Without Overfitting: Analyzing the Training Dynamics of Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2022
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model training
scaling laws for language models
0.612022
Memorization Without Overfitting: Analyzing the Training Dynamics of Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
contrastive learning
0.212024
Effective pruning of web-scale datasets based on complexity of concept clusters · ICLR 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

scaling laws · 1.7causally regularized tokenization · 1.7quantization · 0.9parameter-efficient fine-tuning · 0.9next-token prediction · 0.9modality-specific encoding · 0.9low-rank adaptation · 0.9diffusion · 0.9concept clustering · 0.8complexity-based pruning · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 The Unreasonable Ineffectiveness of the Deeper Layers
abstract
How is knowledge stored in an LLM’s weights? We study this via layer pruning: if removing a certain layer does not affect model performance in common question-answering benchmarks, then the weights in that layer are not necessary for storing the knowledge needed to answer those questions. To find these unnecessary parameters, we identify the optimal block of layers to prune by considering similarity across layers; then, to “heal” the damage, we perform a small amount of finetuning. Surprisingly, with this method we find minimal degradation of performance until after a large fraction (up to half) of the layers are removed for some common open-weight models. From a scientific perspective, the robustness of these LLMs to the deletion of layers implies either that current pretraining methods are not properly leveraging the parameters in the deeper layers of the network or that the shallow layers play a critical role in storing knowledge. For our study, we use parameter-efficient finetuning (PEFT) methods, specifically quantization and Low Rank Adapters (QLoRA), such that each of our experiments can be performed on a single 40GB A100 GPU.
Andrey Gromov, Kushal Tirumala, Hassan Shapourian, Paolo Glorioso, Daniel A. Roberts
ICLR2
2025 Transfusion: Predict the Next Token and Diffuse Images with One Multi-Modal Model
abstract
We introduce Transfusion, a recipe for training a multi-modal model over discrete and continuous data. Transfusion combines the language modeling loss function (next token prediction) with diffusion to train a single transformer over mixed-modality sequences. We pretrain multiple Transfusion models up to 7B parameters from scratch on a mixture of text and image data, establishing scaling laws with respect to a variety of uni- and cross-modal benchmarks. Our experiments show that Transfusion scales significantly better than quantizing images and training a language model over discrete image tokens. By introducing modality-specific encoding and decoding layers, we can further improve the performance of Transfusion models, and even compress each image to just 16 patches. We further demonstrate that scaling our Transfusion recipe to 7B parameters and 2T multi-modal tokens produces a model that can generate images and text on a par with similar scale diffusion models and language models, reaping the benefits of both worlds.
Chunting Zhou, Lili Yu, Arun Babu, Kushal Tirumala, Michihiro Yasunaga, Leonid Shamis, Jacob Kahn, Xuezhe Ma, Luke Zettlemoyer, Omer Levy
ICLR4
2025 When Worse is Better: Navigating the Compression Generation Trade-off In Visual Tokenization
abstract
Current image generation methods are based on a two-stage training approach. In stage 1, an auto-encoder is trained to compress an image into a latent space; in stage 2, a generative model is trained to learn a distribution over that latent space. This reveals a fundamental trade-off, do we compress more aggressively to make the latent distribution easier for the stage 2 model to learn even if it makes reconstruction worse? We study this problem in the context of discrete, auto-regressive image generation. Through the lens of scaling laws, we show that smaller stage 2 models can benefit from more compressed stage 1 latents even if reconstruction performance worsens, demonstrating that generation modeling capacity plays a role in this trade-off. Diving deeper, we rigorously study the connection between compute scaling and the stage 1 rate-distortion trade-off. Next, we introduce Causally Regularized Tokenization (CRT), which uses knowledge of the stage 2 generation modeling procedure to embed useful inductive biases in stage 1 latents. This regularization improves stage 2 generation performance better by making the tokens easier to model without affecting the stage 1 compression rate and marginally affecting distortion: we are able to improve compute efficiency 2-3$\times$ over baseline. Finally, we use CRT with further optimizations to the visual tokenizer setup to result in a generative pipeline that matches LlamaGen-3B generation performance (2.18 FID) with half the tokens per image (256 vs. 576) and a fourth the total model parameters (775M vs. 3.1B) while using the same architecture and inference procedure.
Vivek Ramanujan, Kushal Tirumala, Armen Aghajanyan, Luke Zettlemoyer, Ali Farhadi
NeurIPS2
2025 CAT: Content-Adaptive Image Tokenization
abstract
Most existing image tokenizers encode images into a fixed number of tokens or patches, overlooking the inherent variability in image complexity and introducing unnecessary computate overhead for simpler images. To address this, we propose Content-Adaptive Tokenizer (CAT), which dynamically adjusts representation capacity based on the image content and encodes simpler images into fewer tokens. We design (1) a caption-based evaluation system that leverages LLMs to predict content complexity and determine the optimal compression ratio for an image, and (2) a novel nested VAE architecture that performs variable-rate compression in a single model. Trained on images with varying complexity, CAT achieves an average of 15% reduction in rFID across seven detail-rich datasets containing text, humans, and complex textures. On natural image datasets like ImageNet and COCO, it reduces token usage by 18% while maintaining high-fidelity reconstructions. We further evaluate CAT on two downstream tasks. For image classification, CAT consistently improves top-1 accuracy across five datasets spanning diverse domains. For image generation, it boosts training throughput by 23% on ImageNet, leading to more efficient learning and improved FIDs over fixed-token baselines.
Junhong Shen, Kushal Tirumala, Michihiro Yasunaga, Ishan Misra, Luke Zettlemoyer, Lili Yu, Chunting Zhou
NeurIPS2
2024 Effective pruning of web-scale datasets based on complexity of concept clusters
abstract
Utilizing massive web-scale datasets has led to unprecedented performance gains in machine learning models, but also imposes outlandish compute requirements for their training. In order to improve training and data efficiency, we here push the limits of pruning large-scale multimodal datasets for training CLIP-style models. Today’s most effective pruning method on ImageNet clusters data samples into separate concepts according to their embedding and prunes away the most proto- typical samples. We scale this approach to LAION and improve it by noting that the pruning rate should be concept-specific and adapted to the complexity of the concept. Using a simple and intuitive complexity measure, we are able to reduce the training cost to a quarter of regular training. More specifically, we are able to outperform the LAION-trained OpenCLIP-ViT-B/32 model on ImageNet zero-shot accuracy by 1.1p.p. while only using 27.7% of the data and training compute. On the DataComp Medium benchmark, we achieve a new state-of-the-art ImageNet zero-shot accuracy and a competitive average zero-shot accuracy on 38 evaluation tasks.
Amro Abbas, Evgenia Rusak, Kushal Tirumala, Wieland Brendel, Kamalika Chaudhuri, Ari S. Morcos
ICLR3
2023 D4: Improving LLM Pretraining via Document De-Duplication and Diversification
abstract
Over recent years, an increasing amount of compute and data has been poured into training large language models (LLMs), usually by doing one-pass learning on as many tokens as possible randomly selected from large-scale web corpora. While training on ever-larger portions of the internet leads to consistent performance improvements, the size of these improvements diminishes with scale, and there has been little work exploring the effect of data selection on pre-training and downstream performance beyond simple de-duplication methods such as MinHash. Here, we show that careful data selection (on top of de-duplicated data) via pre-trained model embeddings can speed up training (20% efficiency gains) and improves average downstream accuracy on 16 NLP tasks (up to 2%) at the 6.7B model scale. Furthermore, we show that repeating data intelligently consistently outperforms baseline training (while repeating random data performs worse than baseline training). Our results indicate that clever data selection can significantly improve LLM pre-training, calls into question the common practice of training for a single epoch on as much data as possible, and demonstrates a path to keep improving our models past the limits of randomly sampling web data.
Kushal Tirumala, Daniel Simig, Armen Aghajanyan, Ari S. Morcos
NeurIPS1
2022 Investigating Generalization by Controlling Normalized Margin
abstract
Weight norm $\|w\|$ and margin $\gamma$ participate in learning theory via the normalized margin $\gamma/\|w\|$. Since standard neural net optimizers do not control normalized margin, it is hard to test whether this quantity causally relates to generalization. This paper designs a series of experimental studies that explicitly control normalized margin and thereby tackle two central questions. First: does normalized margin always have a causal effect on generalization? The paper finds that no—networks can be produced where normalized margin has seemingly no relationship with generalization, counter to the theory of Bartlett et al. (2017). Second: does normalized margin ever have a causal effect on generalization? The paper finds that yes—in a standard training setup, test performance closely tracks normalized margin. The paper suggests a Gaussian process model as a promising explanation for this behavior.
Alexander R. Farhang, Jeremy Bernstein, Kushal Tirumala, Yisong Yue
ICML3
2022 Memorization Without Overfitting: Analyzing the Training Dynamics of Large Language Models
abstract
Despite their wide adoption, the underlying training and memorization dynamics of very large language models is not well understood. We empirically study exact memorization in causal and masked language modeling, across model sizes and throughout the training process. We measure the effects of dataset size, learning rate, and model size on memorization, finding that larger language models memorize training data faster across all settings. Surprisingly, we show that larger models can memorize a larger portion of the data before over-fitting and tend to forget less throughout the training process. We also analyze the memorization dynamics of different parts of speech and find that models memorize nouns and numbers first; we hypothesize and provide empirical evidence that nouns and numbers act as a unique identifier for memorizing individual training examples. Together, these findings present another piece of the broader puzzle of trying to understand what actually improves as models get bigger.
Kushal Tirumala, Aram H. Markosyan, Luke Zettlemoyer, Armen Aghajanyan
NeurIPS1