Papers › DynaPipe: Optimizing Multi-task Training through Dynamic Pipelines
DynaPipe: Optimizing Multi-task Training through Dynamic Pipelines
Chenyu Jiang, Zhen Jia, Shuai Zheng, Yida Wang, Chuan Wu
Multi-task model training has been adopted to enable a single deep neural network model (often a large language model) to handle multiple tasks (e.g., question answering and text summarization). Multi-task training commonly receives input sequences of highly different lengths due to the diverse contexts of different tasks. Padding (to the same sequence length) or packing (short examples into long sequences of the same length) is usually adopted to prepare input samples for model training, which is nonetheless not space or computation efficient. This paper proposes a dynamic micro-batching approach to tackle sequence length variation and enable efficient multi-task model training. We advocate pipeline-parallel training of the large model with variable-length micro-batches, each of which potentially comprises a different number of samples. We optimize micro-batch construction using a dynamic programming-based approach, and handle micro-batch execution time variation through dynamic pipeline and communication scheduling, enabling highly efficient pipeline training. Extensive evaluation on the FLANv2 dataset demonstrates up to 4.39x higher training throughput when training T5, and 3.25x when training GPT, as compared with packing-based baselines. DynaPipe's source code is publicly available at https://github.com/awslabs/optimizing-multitask-training-through-dynamic-pipelines.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections