Understanding Large Language Models: A Comprehensive Guide to AI and NLP

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
2. Historical Foundations of Language Modeling
   2.1 N-Gram Models
   2.2 Recurrent Neural Networks and Long Short-Term Memory
3. The Emergence of Transformers
   3.1 “Attention Is All You Need”
   3.2 Core Innovations in the Transformer Architecture
4. Architecture of Large Language Models
   4.1 Key Building Blocks
   4.2 Model Scaling and Parameter Explosion
   4.3 Positional Encodings and Self-Attention Mechanisms
5. Training Large Language Models
   5.1 Data Requirements and Preprocessing
   5.2 Compute and Hardware Considerations
   5.3 Optimization Techniques and Regularization
   5.4 Curriculum and Fine-Tuning Strategies
6. Evaluation and Benchmarks
   6.1 Perplexity and Other Traditional Metrics
   6.2 Emerging Holistic Benchmarks
   6.3 Multilingual and Domain-Specific Evaluations
7. Applications of Large Language Models
   7.1 Text Generation and Summarization
   7.2 Conversational Agents and Chatbots
   7.3 Machine Translation and Cross-Lingual Transfer
   7.4 Code Generation and Software Engineering
   7.5 Scientific Research and Knowledge Discovery
8. Notable LLM Examples
   8.1 GPT Series (GPT-3, GPT-4, InstructGPT)
   8.2 BERT and T5
   8.3 PaLM, Gopher, and Other Scaled Models
   8.4 LLaMA and Open Source Initiatives
9. Limitations, Risks, and Ethical Considerations
   9.1 Bias and Fairness
   9.2 Hallucination and Reliability
   9.3 Environmental Impact of Large Models
   9.4 Regulatory Concerns and Safety
10. Future Directions
    10.1 Modular and Multimodal Architectures
    10.2 Efficient Fine-Tuning and Parameter-Efficient Methods
    10.3 Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF)
    10.4 Toward Universal Dialogue Agents
11. Conclusion
12. References

---

1. Introduction

In the realm of natural language processing (NLP), few developments have been as transformative as large language models (LLMs). These expansive neural networks, often containing billions—or even trillions—of parameters, have rapidly advanced the frontiers of what machines can do with human language. They generate coherent text, summarize lengthy documents, translate between dozens of languages, and even craft rudimentary software code. Their impact spans industries: healthcare, finance, legal research, entertainment, scientific discovery, and beyond. Indeed, the ongoing evolution of LLMs has reshaped not only NLP research but also broader conversations about artificial intelligence (AI) ethics, safety, and policy.

The swift ascent of LLMs builds upon decades of research in machine learning, computational linguistics, and deep learning. Only a few years ago, language models based on recurrent neural networks (RNNs) or long short-term memory (LSTM) units were considered state of the art. Then came Transformers, spearheaded by the seminal 2017 paper “Attention Is All You Need” (Vaswani et al., 2017). Transformers revolutionized how models process sequential data. Leveraging self-attention mechanisms, these architectures dispensed with recurrence and enabled massively parallelizable computations, thereby facilitating training on huge datasets. The synergy of larger datasets, bigger models, and more capable hardware (particularly GPUs and TPUs) paved the way for the large language models that now dominate AI discourse.

In this extensive article, we delve into the past, present, and future of large language models. We begin by tracing the historical roots of language modeling, from basic n-gram methods to sophisticated recurrent architectures. We then delve into the Transformer revolution, exploring the key innovations that make modern LLMs possible. Our discussion then turns to the architecture and training protocols of LLMs, highlighting the extraordinary scale of these models and the data that fuels them. Next, we examine various benchmarks and evaluation strategies before surveying the myriad applications of LLMs. We also highlight notable large language models—such as BERT, GPT, T5, PaLM, Gopher, and LLaMA—and discuss their unique capabilities. Finally, we address crucial limitations, risks, ethical considerations, and promising future directions. Throughout, we draw on up-to-date sources from the internet, academic papers, and books, ensuring an accurate, comprehensive overview of today’s large language modeling landscape.

---

2. Historical Foundations of Language Modeling

2.1 N-Gram Models

Language modeling, at its core, is the task of predicting the next token (or word) in a sequence given the preceding context. Traditional approaches to language modeling often employed statistical techniques. Among the earliest successful methods were n-gram models, in which the probability of a word depends on the previous n−1n-1n−1 words. For instance, a trigram model would leverage the two preceding words to predict the next word.

N-gram models, popularized in the 1980s and 1990s, are conceptually straightforward but suffer from data sparsity. As the value of nnn grows, the number of possible nnn-grams explodes, necessitating large corpora and extensive smoothing strategies (e.g., Kneser-Ney). While n-gram models laid the foundation for computational linguistics, they were ultimately supplanted by more powerful neural approaches that capture long-range dependencies more effectively.

2.2 Recurrent Neural Networks and Long Short-Term Memory

The introduction of recurrent neural networks (RNNs) in the late 20th century heralded a shift from purely statistical to more learned approaches. RNNs process sequences by maintaining hidden states that evolve over time, allowing them to retain a memory of prior elements in the sequence. In practice, however, vanilla RNNs often struggle with vanishing or exploding gradients when modeling long sequences.

To overcome these training instabilities, long short-term memory (LSTM) networks were developed (Hochreiter & Schmidhuber, 1997). LSTMs introduce gating mechanisms that regulate how information flows into and out of the memory cell, thereby preserving gradients over longer time horizons. For roughly two decades, LSTM-based language models were state-of-the-art, advancing fields such as machine translation, speech recognition, and text generation.

Nevertheless, RNN-based models remained fundamentally sequential. They process text token by token, which means that parallelization across tokens is limited. Training extremely large RNN-based models on massive corpora was computationally expensive and slow. It was against this backdrop that the Transformer architecture emerged, transforming the field by bypassing the sequential bottleneck inherent in recurrent networks.

---

3. The Emergence of Transformers

3.1 “Attention Is All You Need”

In 2017, Vaswani et al. published the groundbreaking paper “Attention Is All You Need,” (NeurIPS, 2017) introducing the Transformer. At its heart lies the self-attention mechanism, which computes pairwise interactions between different positions of a sequence in a single step. This mechanism allows a model to learn contextual relationships without explicit recurrence or convolution.

By employing self-attention layers and feed-forward networks, the original Transformer architecture demonstrated that sequence transduction tasks could be handled more efficiently. Not only were Transformers faster to train (due to parallel computation across sequences), but they also achieved state-of-the-art results on machine translation benchmarks like WMT 2014 English-to-German and English-to-French. The adoption of multi-head attention further enriched the representation capacity, enabling the model to capture multiple types of relationships in parallel.

3.2 Core Innovations in the Transformer Architecture

A typical Transformer includes the following core innovations:

1. Multi-Head Self-Attention: The input sequence is projected into multiple query-key-value spaces, allowing the model to attend to various aspects of the sentence simultaneously.
2. Feed-Forward Layers: Positioned after the self-attention layers, these layers are typically fully connected networks that project the attention outputs back to a desired dimension.
3. Residual Connections and Layer Normalization: These techniques stabilize and accelerate training by ensuring gradients flow more readily through the network.
4. Positional Encoding: Because self-attention has no inherent notion of sequence order, positional encodings (usually sinusoidal) are added to token embeddings to provide ordering information.

Beyond these architectural choices, Transformers have proven amenable to scaling. By increasing the depth (layers) and width (embedding dimensions, number of attention heads), researchers have repeatedly shown that performance continues to improve with more parameters, albeit at considerable computational cost.

---

4. Architecture of Large Language Models

4.1 Key Building Blocks

At a high level, large language models typically consist of a massive stack of Transformer encoder or decoder blocks. Architectures vary in their specifics; some adopt an encoder-only design (e.g., BERT), others use decoder-only (e.g., GPT), while still others combine encoder-decoder modules (e.g., T5). Despite these structural divergences, LLMs tend to share common building blocks derived from the original Transformer concept:

• Word Embeddings: Often, a learned vocabulary embedding converts tokens into continuous vector spaces.
• Positional Embeddings: Or a variant of sinusoidal or learned positional information.
• Multiple Self-Attention Layers: Sometimes interleaved with cross-attention layers in encoder-decoder models.
• Feed-Forward Networks: Usually large expansions of the embedding dimension (up to 4,096 or more).
• Layer Normalization: Applied before or after the attention/FFN blocks, depending on design choices (e.g., Pre-LN vs. Post-LN).

4.2 Model Scaling and Parameter Explosion

Over the past few years, the number of parameters in state-of-the-art language models has grown from hundreds of millions to hundreds of billions—and, more recently, to trillions. This parameter explosion has been fueled by the observation that scaling (i.e., increasing model size) correlates with improved performance across a broad suite of NLP benchmarks. However, training such massive models requires parallel distribution across multiple GPUs or specialized hardware (like Google’s TPUs). Consequently, LLM research has become deeply intertwined with advances in large-scale distributed computing.

4.3 Positional Encodings and Self-Attention Mechanisms

The hallmark of Transformers is the self-attention mechanism. Each token in the sequence is transformed into three vectors: a query, key, and value. The attention score for each token pair (i,j)(i, j)(i,j) is calculated via a scaled dot product between QiQ_iQi​ and KjK_jKj​. Weighted sums of values, modulated by these attention scores, allow each token to selectively gather contextual cues from other tokens. Positional encodings (either sinusoidal or learned) ensure that the model doesn’t lose track of the order in the sequence. This approach grants Transformers the ability to focus on both local and global relationships in a non-sequential manner, making them highly suitable for large-scale parallel processing.

---

5. Training Large Language Models

5.1 Data Requirements and Preprocessing

Data is the lifeblood of large language models. Their performance hinges on exposure to massive corpora of text covering diverse domains—from news articles and books to web content, social media, and academic papers. For instance, GPT-3 (Brown et al., 2020) was trained on hundreds of billions of tokens, culled from sources like Common Crawl and WebText.

Preprocessing typically entails:

• Tokenization: Converting text into subword units (e.g., byte-pair encoding, SentencePiece).
• Filtering: Removing low-quality or duplicate content.
• Deduplication: Minimizing redundancy in the training corpus.
• Balancing Domains: Ensuring an appropriate mix of genres, styles, and languages (particularly for multilingual models).

5.2 Compute and Hardware Considerations

The computational cost of training LLMs can be astronomical. Modern training runs can span weeks on hundreds or thousands of GPUs or TPUs. Researchers must address memory constraints with techniques like model parallelism (sharding parameters across devices) and pipeline parallelism (dividing layers across devices). Mixed-precision training (FP16, BF16) is now standard practice, improving memory efficiency and speed. Further optimizations like gradient checkpointing, which trades compute for memory by saving partial intermediate states, also help manage hardware limitations.

5.3 Optimization Techniques and Regularization

Standard training typically uses variants of Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) with momentum or Adam (Kingma & Ba, 2015). However, LLM training also involves careful hyperparameter tuning, including learning rate schedules (e.g., linear warmup, cosine decay). Large batch sizes can expedite training, but they risk convergence issues if not managed properly.

Regularization strategies such as dropout, weight decay, and early stopping can mitigate overfitting—though overfitting is less common in huge corpora. Additionally, methods like stochastic depth and label smoothing (more typical in classification tasks) appear sporadically in language modeling contexts.

5.4 Curriculum and Fine-Tuning Strategies

LLMs are often trained in a self-supervised manner (i.e., next-token prediction), which provides abundant unlabeled data. However, fine-tuning can adapt a pretrained model to specialized tasks or domains. Fine-tuning strategies vary:

• Task-Specific Fine-Tuning: Training the model on a labeled dataset (e.g., sentiment analysis).
• Instruction Fine-Tuning: Training on datasets of “instruction + desired output” pairs for more controllable generation (Ouyang et al., 2022).
• Prompt Engineering: Sometimes, no additional gradient-based fine-tuning is required; carefully crafted prompts elicit the desired behavior from the base model.

Various techniques like LoRA (Low-Rank Adaptation), Adapters, and Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT) have gained attention, allowing large models to adapt to new tasks without retraining all parameters.

---

6. Evaluation and Benchmarks

6.1 Perplexity and Other Traditional Metrics

Historically, perplexity (PP) has served as a principal metric for language modeling. Perplexity measures how well a model predicts a test set; lower perplexity signals better performance. Concretely, perplexity is the exponential of the average negative log-likelihood over all tokens in the evaluation set. Despite its direct alignment with likelihood-based training, perplexity does not fully capture all dimensions of language model performance (e.g., coherence in long text generation, factual accuracy, or faithfulness to instructions).

6.2 Emerging Holistic Benchmarks

As LLM capabilities have expanded, so too have the benchmarks. Researchers introduced tasks like GLUE, SuperGLUE, SQuAD (question answering), and Natural Language Inference to measure a model’s language understanding and reasoning. More holistic benchmarks such as BIG-Bench (Srivastava et al., 2022) and MMLU (Hendrycks et al., 2021) incorporate a wide array of tasks, including mathematics, science, and specialized domain knowledge. These tests evaluate not just raw language fluency but also reasoning, factual correctness, and domain-specific competence.

6.3 Multilingual and Domain-Specific Evaluations

Some LLMs target multilingual proficiency. Models like mBERT, XLM-R, and large-scale systems (e.g., multilingual T5) must be tested on cross-lingual benchmarks such as XTREME or XGLUE. Domain-specific LLMs, such as SciBERT or BioBERT, require evaluations on specialized corpora (e.g., biomedical articles, patent documents). Accurate and fair multilingual or domain-specific evaluations remain a work in progress, due to inherent data imbalances and domain complexities.

---

7. Applications of Large Language Models

7.1 Text Generation and Summarization

One of the most striking feats of LLMs is coherent text generation. Models like GPT-3 can produce short stories, poems, news articles, or even simplistic marketing copy, often blurring the line between human- and machine-generated text. Summarization is another compelling use case: LLMs can compress lengthy documents into succinct overviews. Tools built on these models have been adopted by journalists, researchers, and professionals who handle voluminous textual data.

7.2 Conversational Agents and Chatbots

LLMs form the backbone of modern conversational AI, powering chatbots and virtual assistants that engage in open-domain discussions (Adolphs et al., 2022). By fine-tuning on dialogue datasets, these models learn to respond contextually, remember conversation history, and even maintain personality traits. However, open-ended conversation is also where issues of bias, toxicity, and factual inaccuracies can surface, necessitating robust monitoring and moderation.

7.3 Machine Translation and Cross-Lingual Transfer

While specialized machine translation systems still thrive, LLMs—particularly those exposed to multilingual corpora—often achieve impressive translation results. Moreover, LLMs facilitate cross-lingual transfer: a model trained predominantly on English data can transfer knowledge to low-resource languages, provided it has been pretrained in a multilingual setting. This has profound implications for expanding NLP availability across diverse linguistic communities.

7.4 Code Generation and Software Engineering

Interestingly, LLMs have also made their mark in code generation. Models like OpenAI’s Codex, which is based on GPT, can generate functional code snippets given a natural-language prompt. This phenomenon extends to debugging, refactoring, and providing step-by-step logic explanations. Though these systems are not flawless, they offer a valuable productivity boost and a glimpse into how AI could shape software engineering in the coming years.

7.5 Scientific Research and Knowledge Discovery

LLMs can accelerate scientific research by helping researchers sift through massive volumes of academic literature. Tools based on LLMs parse papers, identify relevant data, generate hypotheses, and even draft academic manuscripts. For instance, biomedical LLMs are being used to propose new drug targets or interpret complex genomic data. Despite concerns about veracity (i.e., hallucinated references or unverified claims), these models hold promise for augmenting human expertise in specialized fields.

---

8. Notable LLM Examples

8.1 GPT Series (GPT-3, GPT-4, InstructGPT)

OpenAI’s GPT (Generative Pretrained Transformer) series is emblematic of the large-scale Transformer revolution. Each GPT iteration (Radford et al., 2018; Brown et al., 2020; Ouyang et al., 2022) scaled in parameter count and dataset size, yielding ever-improving capabilities. GPT-3, with 175 billion parameters, showcased an uncanny ability to perform few-shot learning. GPT-4, though details on its architecture and parameter count remain partially undisclosed, pushed the boundaries further in multi-modal tasks, advanced reasoning, and overall reliability. Additionally, InstructGPT utilized reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) to align model outputs with desired instructions, reducing harmful and unhelpful completions.

8.2 BERT and T5

Google’s BERT (Devlin et al., 2019) introduced the masked language modeling objective, wherein tokens within a sequence are randomly masked, and the model learns to predict them. This approach yielded powerful contextual representations for downstream tasks. Later, T5 (Raffel et al., 2020) generalized the text-to-text paradigm: every NLP task is reframed as a text-in, text-out problem. With hundreds of millions to billions of parameters, T5 excelled at classification, summarization, question answering, and more.

8.3 PaLM, Gopher, and Other Scaled Models

Researchers continue to push scaling limits. PaLM (Chowdhery et al., 2022) from Google introduced a 540-billion-parameter architecture trained with the Pathways system, demonstrating impressive few-shot and chain-of-thought reasoning. Gopher (Rae et al., 2021) from DeepMind likewise revealed emergent capabilities at 280 billion parameters, fueling discourse around the interplay between scale and intelligence.

8.4 LLaMA and Open Source Initiatives

Meta AI’s LLaMA (Touvron et al., 2023) released a series of foundation models ranging from 7 billion to 65 billion parameters, emphasizing the role of open, efficient training recipes. Because LLaMA’s weights were partially open-sourced to the research community (under certain usage restrictions), it catalyzed a wave of derivative models and fine-tuned variants, spurring innovation in the open-source LLM ecosystem. This underscores a broader tension in AI research: balancing proprietary development with open collaboration to accelerate progress responsibly.

---

9. Limitations, Risks, and Ethical Considerations

9.1 Bias and Fairness

LLMs learn from massive datasets scraped off the internet, which inevitably contain biases reflecting societal prejudices. These biases may manifest as stereotypes in generated text or skewed performance across demographic groups. Ensuring fairness demands careful curation of training corpora, balanced data sampling, and post-hoc mitigation strategies (e.g., adversarial training, bias detection filters). Research also suggests that RLHF can help align models toward more equitable outputs, yet eradicating deeply ingrained biases remains a formidable challenge.

9.2 Hallucination and Reliability

A well-documented pitfall of LLMs is “hallucination”: confidently generating text that is factually incorrect or nonsensical. This arises from the model’s proclivity to produce plausible-sounding sequences rather than validated facts. While hallucination might be inconsequential in creative writing, it becomes perilous in high-stakes domains like healthcare or law. Efforts to reduce hallucinations include retrieval-augmented generation (e.g., RAG) and instruction fine-tuning with domain experts. Nonetheless, guaranteeing absolute factual correctness remains elusive.

9.3 Environmental Impact of Large Models

Training LLMs is resource-intensive, consuming large amounts of electricity and contributing to carbon emissions. Studies have highlighted the growing energy footprint of AI (Strubell et al., 2019). Some initiatives, such as greener data centers, optimizing model architectures, and employing more efficient hardware, aim to mitigate this impact. Nevertheless, the trend toward ever-larger models raises pressing questions about the sustainability of this approach.

9.4 Regulatory Concerns and Safety

As LLMs integrate into critical systems (finance, healthcare, legal, etc.), regulatory bodies are grappling with how to ensure safety and transparency. Issues include intellectual property rights (e.g., copying from copyrighted text), potential facilitation of misinformation, and compliance with data protection regulations like GDPR. The deployment of LLMs that can convincingly impersonate humans or generate fraudulent content adds further urgency to calls for transparent, interpretable AI.

---

10. Future Directions

10.1 Modular and Multimodal Architectures

While text-based LLMs continue to flourish, the horizon is broadening toward multimodal systems that handle text, images, audio, and video simultaneously. Models like DALL·E (Ramesh et al., 2021) and CLIP (Radford et al., 2021) foreshadow a future where language understanding is integrated with visual perception. Efforts toward modular architectures—where specialized sub-networks handle distinct modalities or tasks—aim to craft more flexible, efficient AI systems.

10.2 Efficient Fine-Tuning and Parameter-Efficient Methods

Given the expense of training giant models, the community is increasingly exploring parameter-efficient fine-tuning. Methods such as LoRA (Hu et al., 2022), Adapters, and Prefix-Tuning reduce the need to modify all parameters, thereby lowering computational overhead and memory demands. This approach democratizes access to powerful LLMs by allowing smaller organizations to adapt them for niche applications without incurring massive training costs.

10.3 Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF)

Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has gained traction as a mechanism to align model outputs with user intent and ethical norms. In the RLHF loop, human annotators rate or rank model outputs, providing a reward signal. The model is then refined using reinforcement learning (e.g., Proximal Policy Optimization). This approach underpinned InstructGPT and has been widely adopted across multiple LLM ecosystems. Still, RLHF depends on the quality, consistency, and diversity of human feedback—raising questions about scalability and cultural biases in the annotation process.

10.4 Toward Universal Dialogue Agents

As models like ChatGPT, Bard, and other advanced chatbot systems gain popularity, the ultimate vision is a universal dialogue agent capable of understanding diverse topics, performing complicated tasks, and maintaining coherent, context-rich conversations over extended periods. Achieving this vision demands not only bigger models but also refined techniques for memory, personalized context retention, and real-time knowledge updates. Ongoing research in neural memory architectures, knowledge graph integration, and online learning strives to bridge these gaps, inching toward more general-purpose AI systems.

---

11. Conclusion

The rise of large language models marks a seismic shift in how machines process and generate natural language. Rooted in the historical lineage of n-gram models and recurrent neural networks, LLMs truly blossomed with the advent of the Transformer architecture. Their massive parameter counts, trained on gargantuan corpora, enable functionalities once considered purely speculative: producing coherent, context-aware text across myriad tasks with minimal user-provided examples.

Yet, this leap in capability brings with it a host of ethical, technical, and societal dilemmas. Issues of bias, environmental impact, hallucination, and regulatory oversight loom large. Simultaneously, exciting new directions beckon—multimodal integration, parameter-efficient fine-tuning, and robust alignment via RLHF, to name a few. As academic and industrial labs continue to push the boundaries of scale, a harmonious balance between innovation and responsible deployment remains paramount.

The quest to “understand large language models” extends beyond a purely technical inquiry: it is equally about grappling with the broader cultural, ethical, and policy implications of machines that can so convincingly wield language. The future of LLMs will undoubtedly shape—and be shaped by—our collective efforts to harness these tools safely and equitably, forging an era in which humans and AI collaborate to expand the frontiers of knowledge, creativity, and societal well-being.

References

Bahdanau, D., Cho, K., & Bengio, Y. (2015).
Neural Machine Translation by Jointly Learning to Align and Translate.
In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR).
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/1409.0473

Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., … Amodei, D. (2020).
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners.
Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33.
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.14165

Chowdhery, A., Narang, S., Devlin, J., Bosma, M., Mishra, G., Roberts, A., … Dean, J. (2022).
PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways.
arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.02311.
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.02311

Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019).
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding.
In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.04805

Hendrycks, D., Burns, C., Basart, S., Zou, A., Ma, A., Darshan, S., … Song, D. (2021).
Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding.
In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR).
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.03300

Hu, E., Shen, Y., Wallis, P., Allen-Zhu, Z., Li, Y., Wang, L., & Chen, W. (2022).
LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Models.
arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.09685.
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.09685

Kaplan, J., McCandlish, S., Henighan, T., Brown, T., Chess, B., Child, R., … Amodei, D. (2020).
Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models.
arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.08361.
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.08361

Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2015).
Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization.
In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR).
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980

Ouyang, X., Wu, K., Jiang, H., Reddy, S., Chen, Q., Chen, X., … Le, Q.V. (2022).
Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback.
arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.02155.
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.02155

Rae, J. W., Borgeaud, S., Cai, T., Millican, K., Hoffman, J., Song, F., … Simonyan, K. (2021).
Scaling Language Models: Methods, Analysis & Insights from Training Gopher.
arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.11446.
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.11446

Raffel, C., Shazeer, N. M., Roberts, A., Lee, K., Narang, S., Matena, M., … Liu, P. J. (2020).
Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer.
Journal of Machine Learning Research, 21(140).
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.10683

Ramesh, A., Pavlov, M., Goh, G., Gray, S., & Voss, C. (2021).
Zero-Shot Text-to-Image Generation.
In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML).
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.12092

Radford, A., Narasimhan, K., Salimans, T., & Sutskever, I. (2018).
Improving Language Understanding by Generative Pre-Training.
OpenAI Technical Report.
Link: https://cdn.openai.com/research-covers/language-unsupervised/language_understanding_paper.pdf

Radford, A., Kim, J. W., Hallacy, C., Ramesh, A., Goh, G., Agarwal, S., … Sutskever, I. (2021).
Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision.
arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.00020.
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.00020

Srivastava, A., Raffel, C., Pope, R., Bouchard, G., Kumar, S., & Shazeer, N. (2022).
BIG-Bench: Beyond the Imitation Game.
arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.04615.
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.04615

Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., & McCallum, A. (2019).
Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLP.
In Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.02243

Touvron, H., Lavril, T., Izacard, G., Martinet, X., Lachaux, M.-A., Lacroix, T., … Joulin, A. (2023).
LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models.
arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971.
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.13971

Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., … Polosukhin, I. (2017).
Attention Is All You Need.
Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30.
Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03762