Summary (Overview)
- Complete-muE is a novel framework for transferring hyperparameters (learning rate, weight decay, initialization) across dense FFN and Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) transformer architectures, enabling a "tune dense once, transfer to all" recipe.
- The framework uses a two-bridge system: Bridge I maps dense FFN ↔ Dense MoE via active-width μP with a normalized router scale, and Bridge II maps Dense MoE ↔ sparse MoE via activated-expert scaling where the first-order SDE LR/WD correction cancels.
- Complete-muE covers all MoE scaling axes: activated experts, total capacity, granularity, shared experts, group-balanced routing, as well as general width/depth/batch/duration changes.
- Extensive experiments on language models (LM) and diffusion models (DF) confirm stable hyperparameter optima across all MoE configurations, with only minor drift consistent with the non-strict SDE behavior of Bridge II.
- Large-scale runs achieve ~4.5× convergence speedup on 240P 5s video diffusion models and 5.3×–5.5× on LLM training with 100k iterations, without per-setting retuning.
Introduction and Theoretical Foundation
Background and Motivation
The paper addresses a critical gap in hyperparameter transfer for MoE models. MoE architectures expose scaling axes absent from dense FFNs—per-expert width h, activated experts a, total experts N, shared experts, and group-balanced routing. Changing these axes also changes expert data exposure: with balanced routing, each expert processes roughly tokens per step and tokens over training.
The Gap in Existing Tools
| Tool | Limitation |
|---|---|
| μP (Tensor Programs) | Connects dense FFNs to Dense MoE through active width but cannot handle changes in per-expert token batch size |
| SDE rules | Transfer across token batch size for fixed architecture but cannot handle architecture changes |
Neither tool can simultaneously handle both architecture changes and token batch size changes that occur in dense-to-sparse MoE transfer.
Theoretical Foundation
The unified FFN/MoE formulation represents all cases as:
where is the hidden width active on token x. Table 1 shows how this specializes:
| Case | Choice of | Active width | Route scale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dense FFN | One always-active dense block (), | 1 | |
| Dense MoE | All experts active (), | ||
| Sparse MoE | Top- routed experts, |
Methodology
Bridge I: Dense FFN ↔ Dense MoE via Active-Width μP
Bridge I matches a dense FFN with active width H to a Dense MoE with the same active width. The transfer rules are:
The normalized route scale is critical: since normalized routing averages expert outputs (shrinking the update by 1/a), the correction is:
Bridge II: Dense MoE ↔ Sparse MoE via Activated-Expert Scaling
The layer-level transfer across activated experts follows:
Expert-side SDE cancellation: Under approximate load balancing, one expert receives:
For a change at fixed global batch B and fixed optimizer steps T, the expert-side batch and duration ratios are identical (), so the SDE correction cancels:
Residual σ₀ shift: What does shift is the expert-side signal-to-noise parameter: . This produces bounded, minor hyperparameter drift—not exact invariance.
Composition Rules for All MoE Variants
The key insight is that total-expert and granularity changes are not new primitive rules—they derive from composing Bridges I and II:
- Total expert count (capacity): Compose Dense-MoE companion width transfer (Bridge I) with reverse-sparsity (Bridge II). The dense-width and sparsification factors cancel, leaving the same sparse-layer rule.
- Fixed-density granularity: Since is fixed, the sparse active width has the same ratio as the Dense-MoE companion width; no extra SDE correction is needed.
- Shared/group-balanced/hybrid blocks: One common FFN-output ABC parametrization applied to total active width :
Empirical Validation / Results
Controlled Small-Scale Sweeps
Activated experts (Bridge II): Complete-muE keeps LR, WD, and init optima broad and aligned across 64e2a through 64e16a:
- LR range: –
- WD: 0.01–0.2 (LM), – (diffusion)
- Init std: – (LM), – (diffusion)
All MoE axes: Capacity, granularity, shared experts, group-balanced routing, depth, and width all preserve similar LR optima. Larger a consistently reaches lower attainable loss (improved expert-side SNR).
Batch/duration transfer: For batch sizes 128–1024, optima stay close at both fixed steps and fixed samples. At fixed samples, is exact; at fixed steps, transfer is approximate with minor drift consistent with the σ₀ shift.
Fixed-Hyperparameter Loss Scaling
Fixing AdamW hyperparameters at dense-tuned values (LM: LR=, init std=, WD=0.1; DF: LR=, init std=, WD=) and varying only the MoE architecture yields consistent loss reduction across activated experts, total capacity, granularity, and depth—direct evidence for the tune-dense-once recipe.
Systems Benchmark (Single H100)
| Scaling Axis | Configuration | Latency Range | vs Dense Baseline (81.0 ms) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capacity | E=8–256, k=8, h=2048 | 87.8–97.0 ms/step | 1.08×–1.20× slower |
| Granularity | k=2–64, active width 16,384 | 84.1–135.0 ms/step | up to 1.67× slower |
| Dense width | width scaling | 81.0–667.6 ms/step | up to 8.2× slower (OOM beyond) |
Key finding: Capacity scaling is the cheaper axis when token batch size per device is large enough.
Large-Scale Results
Convergence speedups (dense steps / MoE steps to reach same loss):
- 256P images: ~2.5×
- 240P 5s videos: ~4.5×
- LLM (100k iterations): 5.3×–5.5×
LLM benchmark evaluation (13 tasks, 100k steps):
| Model | Average Score |
|---|---|
| Dense | 44.3 |
| MoE 128e8a4g1s | 49.1 |
| MoE 128e8a1s | 50.6 |
Both MoE variants improve over dense; the non-grouped variant is best on average, while the group-balanced variant is strongest on ARC-Challenge.
Theoretical and Practical Implications
Theoretical Contributions
- Identification of the bottleneck: Dense-to-sparse MoE transfer couples architecture and workload transfer—neither μP nor SDE rules alone can handle this.
- Two-bridge compositional framework: Rather than treating dense-to-sparse as one direct jump, the authors decompose it into two well-grounded bridges (active-width μP + expert-side SDE bookkeeping).
- Non-strict SDE invariance: Bridge II reveals that activated-expert transfer is not exact SDE invariance—a residual shift remains, producing bounded, minor drift. This explains why expert-count sweeps show mild optimizer drift in practice.
Practical Implications
- "Tune dense once, transfer to all": A single dense-FFN calibration suffices for near-optimal hyperparameters across the entire MoE design space.
- Capacity over granularity: H100 benchmarks show capacity scaling is much cheaper than fine granularity at fixed active width.
- Shared experts caveat: Increasing shared experts consistently leads to higher loss unless used for computation/communication overlap in expert-parallel training.
- Cross-modal transfer: One hyperparameter setting transfers across images (256P/512P), key frames, videos, and language modeling.
Conclusion
Complete-muE provides a compositional AdamW transfer rule for FFN/MoE families, bridging the gap between dense and sparse architectures through two well-grounded bridges. The framework covers activated experts, total capacity, fixed-density granularity, shared/group-balanced hybrids, and width/depth/batch/duration changes.
Key takeaways:
- Hyperparameters tuned on a single dense reference transfer near-optimally to all MoE configurations
- Mild drift is consistent with Bridge II's non-strict SDE behavior and small enough for practical use
- Large-scale MoE training achieves significant convergence speedups (up to 4.5× video, 5.3×–5.5× LLM) with minimum tuning overhead
Future directions likely include: extending to expert-choice routing, deeper analysis of the σ₀ shift for exact invariance, and application to additional modalities and model families beyond the tested LM and diffusion transformer settings.
Related papers
- Normalize-Then-Precondition: A Hierarchical Approach to Marginal Scale and Interaction Geometry for LLM Training
NormPre separates LLM update normalization from spectral preconditioning, consistently beating AdamW, Muon, and MANO in pretraining while cutting optimizer latency by up to 67%.
- Balancing Early Performance Sacrifices with Long-Term Gains: Scaling Learning-Rate Warmup Duration Across Training Horizons
Optimal learning-rate warmup duration scales with training horizon only at high peak learning rates, following a regime-dependent law predictable from three short runs.
- STEPQuant: When and Where Errors Matter in Delta-Rule Recurrent State Quantization
STEPQuant achieves near-FP32 accuracy at 6-bit recurrent state quantization via lifetime-aware bit allocation and key-row-aware dual-axis fitting, cutting serving memory by 68.7%.