SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2407.05467

The infrastructure powering IBM's Gen AI model development

Talia Gershon·Seetharami Seelam·Brian Belgodere·Milton Bonilla·Lan Hoang·Danny Barnett·I-Hsin Chung·Apoorve Mohan·Ming-Hung Chen·Lixiang Luo·Robert Walkup·Constantinos Evangelinos·Shweta Salaria·Marc Dombrowa·Yoonho Park·Apo Kayi·Liran Schour·Alim Alim·Ali Sydney·Pavlos Maniotis·Laurent Schares·Bernard Metzler·Bengi Karacali-Akyamac·Sophia Wen·Tatsuhiro Chiba·Sunyanan Choochotkaew·Takeshi Yoshimura·Claudia Misale·Tonia Elengikal·Kevin O Connor·Zhuoran Liu·Richard Molina·Lars Schneidenbach·James Caden·Christopher Laibinis·Carlos Fonseca·Vasily Tarasov·Swaminathan Sundararaman·Frank Schmuck·Scott Guthridge·Jeremy Cohn·Marc Eshel·Paul Muench·Runyu Liu·William Pointer·Drew Wyskida·Bob Krull·Ray Rose·Brent Wolfe·William Cornejo·John Walter·Colm Malone·Clifford Perucci·Frank Franco·Nigel Hinds·Bob Calio·Pavel Druyan·Robert Kilduff·John Kienle·Connor McStay·Andrew Figueroa·Matthew Connolly·Edie Fost·Gina Roma·Jake Fonseca·Ido Levy·Michele Payne·Ryan Schenkel·Amir Malki·Lion Schneider·Aniruddha Narkhede·Shekeba Moshref·Alexandra Kisin·Olga Dodin·Bill Rippon·Henry Wrieth·John Ganci·Johnny Colino·Donna Habeger-Rose·Rakesh Pandey·Aditya Gidh·Aditya Gaur·Dennis Patterson·Samsuddin Salmani·Rambilas Varma·Rumana Rumana·Shubham Sharma·Mayank Mishra·Rameswar Panda·Aditya Prasad·Matt Stallone·Gaoyuan Zhang·Yikang Shen·David Cox·Ruchir Puri·Dakshi Agrawal·Drew Thorstensen·Joel Belog·Brent Tang·Saurabh Kumar Gupta

Abstract

AI Infrastructure plays a key role in the speed and cost-competitiveness of developing and deploying advanced AI models. The current demand for powerful AI infrastructure for model training is driven by the emergence of generative AI and foundational models, where on occasion thousands of GPUs must cooperate on a single training job for the model to be trained in a reasonable time. Delivering efficient and high-performing AI training requires an end-to-end solution that combines hardware, software and holistic telemetry to cater for multiple types of AI workloads. In this report, we describe IBM's hybrid cloud infrastructure that powers our generative AI model development. This infrastructure includes (1) Vela: an AI-optimized supercomputing capability directly integrated into the IBM Cloud, delivering scalable, dynamic, multi-tenant and geographically distributed infrastructure for large-scale model training and other AI workflow steps and (2) Blue Vela: a large-scale, purpose-built, on-premises hosting environment that is optimized to support our largest and most ambitious AI model training tasks. Vela provides IBM with the dual benefit of high performance for internal use along with the flexibility to adapt to an evolving commercial landscape. Blue Vela provides us with the benefits of rapid development of our largest and most ambitious models, as well as future-proofing against the evolving model landscape in the industry. Taken together, they provide IBM with the ability to rapidly innovate in the development of both AI models and commercial offerings.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Talia Gershon, Seetharami Seelam, Brian Belgodere, Milton Bonilla, Lan Hoang, Danny Barnett, I-Hsin Chung, Apoorve Mohan, Ming-Hung Chen, Lixiang Luo, Robert Walkup, Constantinos Evangelinos, Shweta Salaria, Marc Dombrowa, Yoonho Park, Apo Kayi, Liran Schour, Alim Alim, Ali Sydney, Pavlos Maniotis, Laurent Schares, Bernard Metzler, Bengi Karacali-Akyamac, Sophia Wen, Tatsuhiro Chiba, Sunyanan Choochotkaew, Takeshi Yoshimura, Claudia Misale, Tonia Elengikal, Kevin O Connor, Zhuoran Liu, Richard Molina, Lars Schneidenbach, James Caden, Christopher Laibinis, Carlos Fonseca, Vasily Tarasov, Swaminathan Sundararaman, Frank Schmuck, Scott Guthridge, Jeremy Cohn, Marc Eshel, Paul Muench, Runyu Liu, William Pointer, Drew Wyskida, Bob Krull, Ray Rose, Brent Wolfe, William Cornejo, John Walter, Colm Malone, Clifford Perucci, Frank Franco, Nigel Hinds, Bob Calio, Pavel Druyan, Robert Kilduff, John Kienle, Connor McStay, Andrew Figueroa, Matthew Connolly, Edie Fost, Gina Roma, Jake Fonseca, Ido Levy, Michele Payne, Ryan Schenkel, Amir Malki, Lion Schneider, Aniruddha Narkhede, Shekeba Moshref, Alexandra Kisin, Olga Dodin, Bill Rippon, Henry Wrieth, John Ganci, Johnny Colino, Donna Habeger-Rose, Rakesh Pandey, Aditya Gidh, Aditya Gaur, Dennis Patterson, Samsuddin Salmani, Rambilas Varma, Rumana Rumana, Shubham Sharma, Mayank Mishra, Rameswar Panda, Aditya Prasad, Matt Stallone, Gaoyuan Zhang, Yikang Shen, David Cox, Ruchir Puri, Dakshi Agrawal, Drew Thorstensen, Joel Belog, Brent Tang, Saurabh Kumar Gupta. 2024-07-07. The infrastructure powering IBM's Gen AI model development. https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.05467

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Online Treasure Hunt in Vertex-Permuted Dynamic Rings

We study the problem of treasure hunt by a group of $k \geq 1$ agents in vertex-permuted dynamic rings (VP). In this model, the $n$ vertices remain on a ring but are permuted at each time step. We first show that treasure hunt is impossible for any $k \leq n-3$ agents, if there are no restrictions on the sequence of permutations used in the dynamic ring. We then study the $VP(\delta)$ setting, in which for every pair $i, j$ of vertices, the edge $(i, j)$ is guaranteed to appear within $\delta$ steps. We show that the class $VP(\delta)$ is feasible only for $\delta \geq \left\lceil \frac{n-1}{2}\right\rceil$. For the one-agent case, we show a tight bound of $\Theta(\delta n)$ on the worst-case search time as well as competitive ratio of any online algorithm for treasure hunt, provided $\delta \geq 2n$. We then give an optimal algorithm for $k$ agents, thereby showing that $k$ agents can obtain a speedup of $k$ on the worst-case search time. Finally, in the R-VP setting, in which in every step, the vertices are arranged as a ring according to a random permutation, we show that treasure hunt takes expected $\Theta(n)$ steps against an oblivious adversary and $\Theta(n \log n)$ steps against an adaptive adversary.

cs.DC

The Computing Channel: How Modulation Programs the Airwaves

Distributed computing and distributed artificial intelligence require frequent exchanges of intermediate results, although many applications need only an aggregate rather than messages from individual devices. Conventional systems recover each message before computing the aggregate, whereas over-the-air computation (OAC) exploits simultaneous transmission to obtain it directly. However, dominant OAC implementations rely on analog signaling, creating a mismatch with finite-precision data and digital communication procedures. This article presents digital function-oriented communication, in which finite-alphabet symbol representations and receiver decisions are jointly designed so that multiple-access superposition encodes the desired function without recovering individual inputs. We introduce its computational-constellation principle, main design approaches, extensions, and implementation challenges. Federated edge learning illustrates how the framework can reduce user-dependent data-bearing resources while operating directly on quantized model updates.

cs.DC

Can AI Remediate Backend Failures Safely? GuardedAct with Blast-Radius-Aware Sandboxing

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promising capabilities in generating remediation actions for microservice failures. However, directly executing AI-generated repair actions in production risks cascading collateral damage. We propose GuardedAct, a sandbox-first remediation framework that interposes a blast-radius-aware verification layer between the LLM action generator and the production environment. GuardedAct operates in four phases: (1) ingesting a diagnosis report together with the live system topology and recent telemetry, (2) prompting an LLM to produce a ranked list of candidate remediation actions, (3) simulating each action in a lightweight digital-twin sandbox that estimates the blast radius and assigns a risk label, and (4) enforcing a rollback-confidence gate that auto-executes only low-risk actions while escalating high-risk ones for human review. We evaluate GuardedAct on five fault scenarios injected into the DeathStarBench social-network application. Experimental results show that GuardedAct achieves an overall recovery rate of 87.4% while reducing collateral damage by 79.7% relative to direct LLM execution (from 25.6% to 5.2%), at the cost of a modest sandbox-induced increase in mean time to recovery (approximately 8 s). Ablation studies confirm that each component contributes meaningfully to the safety-speed trade-off.

cs.DC