State Space Models (SSMs) such as Mamba have become a popular alternative to Transformer models, due to their reduced memory consumption and higher throughput at generation compared to their Attention-based counterparts. On the other hand, the community has built up a considerable body of knowledge on how to train Transformers, and many pretrained Transformer models are readily available. To facilitate the adoption of SSMs while leveraging existing pretrained Transformers, we aim to identify an effective recipe to distill an Attention-based model into a Mamba-like architecture. In prior work on cross-architecture distillation, however, it has been shown that a naïve distillation procedure from Transformers to Mamba fails to preserve the original teacher performance, a limitation often overcome with hybrid solutions combining Attention and SSM blocks. The key argument from our work is that, by equipping Mamba with a principled initialization, we can recover an overall better recipe for cross-architectural distillation. To this end, we propose a principled two-stage approach: first, we distill knowledge from a traditional Transformer into a linearized version of Attention, using an adaptation of the kernel trick. Then, we distill the linearized version into an adapted Mamba model that does not use any Attention block. Overall, the distilled Mamba model is able to preserve the original Pythia-1B Transformer performance in downstream tasks, maintaining a perplexity of 14.11 close to the teacher's 13.86. To show the efficacy of our recipe, we conduct thorough ablations at 1B scale with 10B tokens varying sequence mixer architecture, scaling analysis on model sizes and total distillation tokens, and a sensitivity analysis on tokens allocation between stages.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: We propose a two-stage recipe to distill quadratic Softmax Attention (green) in a Transformer layer to a subquadratic Mamba-based Mixer module. Our sequence mixer (HedgeMamba) is a hybrid of a learned linear Attention (Hedgehog ( Zhang et al., 2024 ) in blue) and Mamba Gu and Dao (2023) (yellow). Note that we keep the rest of the Transformer layer as it is from the teacher model (grey); we only swap Softmax Attention with our proposed HedgeMamba mixer.
Figure 2: Schematics of the overall approach followed in our two-stage Transformer-to-Mamba distillation recipe. In stage one, we distill vanilla Attention into a linearized version, by learning a feature map ϕ which approximates the action of softmax (following the Hedgehog procedure ( Zhang et al., 2024 ) ). In stage two, we introduce additional components from the Mamba block, to boost the overall expressivity of the model. The resulting hybrid layer, named HedgeMamba, is then further finetuned to close the performance gap with the original teacher model.
Model (1B)
↓ PPL
↑ Arc-C
Arc-E
SIQA
PiQA
Lambada
BoolQ
RACE
LogiQA
WinoG
HSwag
Pythia (Teacher)
13.86
27.04
56.98
39.86
70.72
42.07
60.82
32.92
22.12
53.43
47.16
Hedgehog (Baseline)
14.89
26.45
52.74
38.38
68.01
30.60
54.80
30.43
21.65
50.91
40.79
HedgeMamba (Ours)
14.11
27.13
53.66
39.76
68.72
32.31
55.20
30.91
20.89
52.17
41.87
Table 1: Comparison with teacher and prior work.
Model (1B)
#params
↓ PPL
↑ Arc-C
Arc-E
SIQA
PiQA
Lambada
BoolQ
RACE
LogiQA
WinoG
HSwag
Hedgehog
1,014M
14.89
26.45
52.74
38.38
68.01
30.60
54.80
30.43
21.66
50.91
40.79
+SSM
1,020M
14.89
26.54
52.90
38.02
68.23
31.24
55.63
30.05
22.73
51.38
40.77
+Conv
1,020M
14.89
26.62
52.74
38.28
68.93
31.63
55.84
30.14
22.43
51.78
40.74
+Gate(HedgeMamba)
1,087M
14.58
26.19
53.11
39.56
68.77
32.16
57.61
31.00
24.42
50.99
41.81
Table 2: Mixer architecture ablations: perplexity on validation set and downstream task performance.
Tokens split
↑ Downstream evals
S1 / S2 (%)
↓ PPL
Arc-C
Arc-E
SIQA
PiQA
Lambada
BoolQ
RACE
LogiQA
WinoG
HSwag
Hedgehog (no FT)
100 / 0
25.71
25.85
48.70
36.34
66.49
12.12
61.47
27.27
20.58
50.83
26.14
90 / 10
16.15
25.00
52.06
38.69
68.93
28.08
56.15
30.24
22.43
51.14
39.69
75 / 25
15.18
26.71
52.31
38.59
69.26
30.66
60.61
30.24
20.58
49.96
41.02
50 / 50
14.58
26.19
53.11
39.56
68.77
32.16
57.61
31.00
24.42
50.99
41.81
25 / 75
14.25
26.19
53.91
39.71
68.93
31.90
55.41
30.81
21.35
51.30
41.59
Table 3: Sensitivity analysis on the token budget allocation. Total 10B distillation tokens. Distillation on full HedgeMamba, with convolution layer and gate branch. Notice that a 100/0 split indicates that no fine-tuning is performed, and all tokens are used for learning the Hedgehog map in stage 1 (S1); conversely, 0/100 indicates only fine-tuning (S2) on the HedgeMamba architecture.
Token budget
↓ PPL
↑ Arc-C
Arc-E
SIQA
PiQA
Lambada
BoolQ
RACE
LogiQA
WinoG
HSwag
1B
16.56
26.19
52.27
38.74
67.68
27.32
57.49
29.76
20.43
52.25
40.67
2B
15.61
25.94
51.05
38.79
69.04
29.30
56.45
29.57
23.04
51.85
40.29
3B
15.15
25.09
52.69
38.43
69.10
30.56
56.57
29.28
23.04
51.93
41.03
10B
14.11
27.13
53.66
39.76
68.72
32.31
55.20
30.91
20.89
52.17
41.87
Table 4: Scaling study on the distillation token budget.
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Model (1B)
↑ Arc-C
Arc-E
SIQA
PiQA
Lambada
BoolQ
RACE
LogiQA
WinoG
HSwag
Pythia(Teacher)
27.05 1.30
56.99 1.02
39.87 1.11
70.73 1.06
42.07 0.69
60.82 0.85
32.92 1.45
22.12 1.62
53.43 1.40
47.16 0.50
Architecture ablations
Hedgehog baseline
26.45 1.29
52.74 1.02
38.38 1.10
68.01 1.09
30.60 0.64
54.80 0.87
30.43 1.42
21.66 1.62
50.91 1.41
40.79 0.49
+SSM
26.54 1.29
52.90 1.02
38.02 1.10
68.23 1.09
31.24 0.65
55.63 0.87
30.05 1.42
22.73 1.64
51.38 1.40
40.77 0.49
+Conv
26.62 1.29
52.74 1.02
38.28 1.10
68.93 1.08
31.63 0.65
55.84 0.87
30.14 1.42
22.43 1.64
51.78 1.40
40.74 0.49
+Gate(HedgeMamba)
26.19 1.28
53.11 1.02
39.56 1.11
68.77 1.08
32.16 0.65
57.61 0.86
31.00 1.43
24.42 1.69
50.99 1.40
41.81 0.49
Appendix
Table 5: Results from experiments in Sec. 4 , including standard error for LM evaluations.
Model
↓ PPL
↑ Arc-C
Arc-E
SIQA
PiQA
Lambada
BoolQ
RACE
LogiQA
WinoG
HSwag
160M
Pythia(Teacher)
39.38
23.63
43.64
36.75
62.30
22.38
56.88
28.71
19.05
51.22
30.28
Hedgehog (Baseline)
35.95
18.26
42.47
37.05
61.15
14.48
59.66
26.41
21.04
50.43
28.93
HedgeMamba (Ours)
26.84
23.04
43.27
37.36
60.88
16.34
57.68
26.03
19.35
51.07
29.71
410M
Pythia(Teacher)
16.50
24.32
51.89
38.95
66.70
36.60
60.58
30.72
21.97
53.27
40.62
Hedgehog (Baseline)
17.66
19.97
47.31
37.97
65.23
24.04
48.44
28.04
19.35
50.28
34.63
HedgeMamba (Ours)
16.48
23.81
49.54
38.69
64.69
25.91
51.68
28.42
21.35
52.80
36.28
Appendix
Table 6: Scaling analysis with respect to model size.
Figure 3: Visualizing evolution of validation perplexity during stage 2 training, for different stage1/stage2 token allocation splits. ⧫ indicates the PPL value at completion of stage 1. All sensitivity studies were run for 200K training steps, corresponding to roughly 10B tokens.
Figure 4: Schematics of architectures discussed in this project. Top: Pythia Transformer. Bottom, from left to right: Hedgehog, HedgeMamba, and Mamba.
Cross-architecture knowledge distillation transfers learned behavior between models with different architectures to build smaller or more efficient systems.