Get live statistics and analysis of anshuman's profile on X / Twitter

She dumped me last night. Not because I don't listen. Not because I'm always on my phone. Not even because I forgot our anniversary (twice). But because, in her exact words: "You only pay attention to the parts of what I say that you think are important." I stared at her for a moment and realized... She just perfectly described the attention mechanism in transformers. Turns out I wasn't being a bad boyfriend. I was being mathematically optimal. See, in conversations (and transformers), you don't give equal weight to every word. Some words matter more for understanding context. Attention figures out exactly HOW important each word should be. Here's the beautiful math: Attention(Q, K, V) = softmax(QK^T / √d_k)V Breaking it down: Q (Query): "What am I looking for?" K (Key): "What info is available?" V (Value): "What is that info?" d_k: Key dimension (for scaling) Think library analogy: You have a question (Query). Books have titles (Keys) and content (Values). Attention finds which books are most relevant. Step-by-step with "The cat sat on the mat": Step 1: Create Q, K, VEach word → three vectors via learned matrices W_Q, W_K, W_V For "cat": Query: "What should I attend to when processing 'cat'?" Key: "I am 'cat'" Value: "Here's cat info" Step 2: Calculate scoresQK^T = how much each word should attend to others Processing "sat"? High similarity with "cat" (cats sit) and "mat" (where sitting happens). Step 3: Scale by √d_kPrevents dot products from getting too large, keeps softmax balanced. Step 4: SoftmaxConverts scores to probabilities: "cat": 0.4 (subject) "sat": 0.3 (action) "mat": 0.2 (location) "on": 0.1 (preposition) "the": 0.1 (article) Step 5: Weight valuesMultiply each word's value by attention weight, sum up. Now "sat" knows it's most related to "cat" and "mat". Multi-Head Magic:Transformers do this multiple times in parallel: Head 1: Subject-verb relationships Head 2: Spatial ("on", "in", "under") Head 3: Temporal ("before", "after") Head 4: Semantic similarity Each head learns different relationship types. Why This Changed Everything: Before: RNNs = reading with flashlight (one word at a time, forget the beginning) After: Attention = floodlights on entire sentence with dimmer switches This is why ChatGPT can: Remember 50 messages ago Know "it" refers to something specific Understand "bank" = money vs river based on context The Kicker:Models learn these patterns from data alone. Nobody programmed grammar rules. It figured out language structure just by predicting next words. Attention is how AI learned to read between the lines. Just like my therapist helped me understand my focus patterns, maybe understanding transformers helps us see how we decide what matters. Now if only I could implement multi-head attention in dating... 🤖 Still waiting for "scaled dot-product listening" to be invented.

this paper changed my life

You're in a ML Engineer interview at Perplexity, and the interviewer asks: "Your RAG system is hallucinating in production. How do you diagnose what's broken - the retriever or the generator?" Here's how you can answer:

You're in an ML inference engineer interview at Anthropic, and the interviewer asks: "Can you explain speculative decoding and why we'd want to use it?" Here's how you can answer:

She dumped me last night. Not because I don't listen. Not because I'm always on my phone. Not even because I forgot our anniversary (twice). But because, in her exact words: "You only pay attention to the parts of what I say that you think are important." I stared at her for a moment and realized... She just perfectly described the attention mechanism in transformers. Turns out I wasn't being a bad boyfriend. I was being mathematically optimal. See, in conversations (and transformers), you don't give equal weight to every word. Some words matter more for understanding context. Attention figures out exactly HOW important each word should be. Here's the beautiful math: Attention(Q, K, V) = softmax(QK^T / √d_k)V Breaking it down: Q (Query): "What am I looking for?" K (Key): "What info is available?" V (Value): "What is that info?" d_k: Key dimension (for scaling) Think library analogy: You have a question (Query). Books have titles (Keys) and content (Values). Attention finds which books are most relevant. Step-by-step with "The cat sat on the mat": Step 1: Create Q, K, VEach word → three vectors via learned matrices W_Q, W_K, W_V For "cat": Query: "What should I attend to when processing 'cat'?" Key: "I am 'cat'" Value: "Here's cat info" Step 2: Calculate scoresQK^T = how much each word should attend to others Processing "sat"? High similarity with "cat" (cats sit) and "mat" (where sitting happens). Step 3: Scale by √d_kPrevents dot products from getting too large, keeps softmax balanced. Step 4: SoftmaxConverts scores to probabilities: "cat": 0.4 (subject) "sat": 0.3 (action) "mat": 0.2 (location) "on": 0.1 (preposition) "the": 0.1 (article) Step 5: Weight valuesMultiply each word's value by attention weight, sum up. Now "sat" knows it's most related to "cat" and "mat". Multi-Head Magic:Transformers do this multiple times in parallel: Head 1: Subject-verb relationships Head 2: Spatial ("on", "in", "under") Head 3: Temporal ("before", "after") Head 4: Semantic similarity Each head learns different relationship types. Why This Changed Everything: Before: RNNs = reading with flashlight (one word at a time, forget the beginning) After: Attention = floodlights on entire sentence with dimmer switches This is why ChatGPT can: Remember 50 messages ago Know "it" refers to something specific Understand "bank" = money vs river based on context The Kicker:Models learn these patterns from data alone. Nobody programmed grammar rules. It figured out language structure just by predicting next words. Attention is how AI learned to read between the lines. Just like my therapist helped me understand my focus patterns, maybe understanding transformers helps us see how we decide what matters. Now if only I could implement multi-head attention in dating... 🤖 Still waiting for "scaled dot-product listening" to be invented.

"Just use OpenAI API" Until you need: - Custom fine-tuned models - <50ms p99 latency - $0.001/1K tokens (not $1.25/1K input) Then you build your own inference platform. Here's how to do that:

I rejected a job offer yesterday. Not because of the salary. Not because of the tech stack. Not even because of the long hours they warned me about. But because, when I asked how they evaluate their AI systems, the hiring manager said: "We just ask it some questions and see if the answers sound right." I stared at them for a moment and realized... They just described the biggest problem in AI today. See, "sounds right" isn't a measurement. It's a hope. Here's what proper LLM evaluation actually looks like: - Accuracy: Can it get factual questions right? (Not 80% of the time. Consistently.) - Hallucination rate: How often does it make things up? (This should be near zero for critical applications.) - Bias metrics: Does it treat all groups fairly? (Measured across demographics, not assumed.) Real Evaluation Frameworks: - BLEU scores for translation quality Perplexity for language modeling Human evaluation with inter-annotator agreement Adversarial testing (red teaming) Domain-specific benchmarks (legal, medical, financial) The Process: > Define success criteria BEFORE deployment > Create diverse test sets (not just happy paths) > Measure consistently across model versions > Track performance over time (models drift) Have humans validate edge cases Why This Matters: Before proper evals: "Our model is amazing!" (based on cherry-picked examples) After proper evals: "Our AI achieves 94.2% accuracy on domain X, with known failure modes Y and Z" The difference? One builds trust. The other destroys it when reality hits. The kicker: Most companies are still in the "sounds right" phase. They're deploying models evaluated by vibes, not metrics. Just like you wouldn't join a team that deploys code without tests, you shouldn't join one that deploys AI without proper evaluation. What's your experience with LLM evaluation? Are we measuring what actually matters?

You're in a ML Engineer interview at Groq, and the interviewer asks: "How do you measure LLM inference performance? What metrics matter most for production systems?" Here's how you can answer

career update: joined zomato as Machine Learning Engineer 2

Techniques I’d master if I wanted to make LLMs faster + cheaper. 1. Quantization 2. KV-Cache Quantization 3. Flash Attention 4. Speculative Decoding 5. LoRA 6. Pruning 7. Knowledge Distillation 8. Weight Sharing 9. Sparse Attention 10. Batching & Dynamic Batching 11. Model Serving Optimization 12. Tensor Parallelism 13. Pipeline Parallelism 14. Paged Attention 15. Mixed Precision Inference 16. Early Exit / Token-Level Pruning

You’re in a AI Engineer interview at Microsoft, and the interviewer asks: ‘Our team needs to build RAG over 10M documents. Which vector database and why?’ Here’s how you answer:

software Engineers have a runway of 5 years left

You're in a ML Engineer interview at Anthropic, and the interviewer asks: "Your LLM inference is running out of GPU memory with long conversations. How do you fix this?" Here's how you answer:

ML concepts every data scientist should know for interviews: Bookmark this. 1. Bias-Variance Tradeoff 2. Cross-Validation Strategies 3. Regularization (L1, L2, Elastic Net) 4. Class Imbalance & Sampling Techniques 5. Feature Engineering & Selection 6. Overfitting vs Underfitting 7. Evaluation Metrics (beyond accuracy) 8. Hyperparameter Tuning 9. Train-Test Data Leakage 10. Ensemble Methods 11. Dimensionality Reduction 12. Model Interpretability (SHAP, LIME) 13. Gradient Descent Variants 14. Activation Functions & Neural Networks 15. Imbalanced Dataset Handling 16. Production Model Monitoring

"Just use Vector Database" Until you need: - 100M+ vectors indexed - <10ms p95 search latency - $50/month (not $500/month) Then you build your own vector database. Here's what that actually means:

“Just rent a GPU for training” Until you need: - Multi-node training for 70B+ models - $5/hour per GPU (not $30/hour) - 90%+ GPU utilization Then you build your own ml infra. Here’s the reality:

She dumped me last night. Not because I don't listen. Not because I'm always on my phone. Not even because I forgot our anniversary (twice). But because, in her exact words: "You only pay attention to the parts of what I say that you think are important." I stared at her for a moment and realized... She just perfectly described the attention mechanism in transformers. Turns out I wasn't being a bad boyfriend. I was being mathematically optimal. See, in conversations (and transformers), you don't give equal weight to every word. Some words matter more for understanding context. Attention figures out exactly HOW important each word should be. Here's the beautiful math: Attention(Q, K, V) = softmax(QK^T / √d_k)V Breaking it down: Q (Query): "What am I looking for?" K (Key): "What info is available?" V (Value): "What is that info?" d_k: Key dimension (for scaling) Think library analogy: You have a question (Query). Books have titles (Keys) and content (Values). Attention finds which books are most relevant. Step-by-step with "The cat sat on the mat": Step 1: Create Q, K, VEach word → three vectors via learned matrices W_Q, W_K, W_V For "cat": Query: "What should I attend to when processing 'cat'?" Key: "I am 'cat'" Value: "Here's cat info" Step 2: Calculate scoresQK^T = how much each word should attend to others Processing "sat"? High similarity with "cat" (cats sit) and "mat" (where sitting happens). Step 3: Scale by √d_kPrevents dot products from getting too large, keeps softmax balanced. Step 4: SoftmaxConverts scores to probabilities: "cat": 0.4 (subject) "sat": 0.3 (action) "mat": 0.2 (location) "on": 0.1 (preposition) "the": 0.1 (article) Step 5: Weight valuesMultiply each word's value by attention weight, sum up. Now "sat" knows it's most related to "cat" and "mat". Multi-Head Magic:Transformers do this multiple times in parallel: Head 1: Subject-verb relationships Head 2: Spatial ("on", "in", "under") Head 3: Temporal ("before", "after") Head 4: Semantic similarity Each head learns different relationship types. Why This Changed Everything: Before: RNNs = reading with flashlight (one word at a time, forget the beginning) After: Attention = floodlights on entire sentence with dimmer switches This is why ChatGPT can: Remember 50 messages ago Know "it" refers to something specific Understand "bank" = money vs river based on context The Kicker:Models learn these patterns from data alone. Nobody programmed grammar rules. It figured out language structure just by predicting next words. Attention is how AI learned to read between the lines. Just like my therapist helped me understand my focus patterns, maybe understanding transformers helps us see how we decide what matters. Now if only I could implement multi-head attention in dating... 🤖 Still waiting for "scaled dot-product listening" to be invented.

We are hiring for 2 Machine Learning Engineers in Bangalore office. you'll work directly with me on super impactful projects Drop your best work in the comments👇 and I will personally reach out to you if you are a fit. Please Don't DM!

this paper changed my life

career update: joined zomato as Machine Learning Engineer 2

She dumped me last night. Not because I don't listen. Not because I'm always on my phone. Not even because I forgot our anniversary (twice). But because, in her exact words: "You only pay attention to the parts of what I say that you think are important." I stared at her for a moment and realized... She just perfectly described the attention mechanism in transformers. Turns out I wasn't being a bad boyfriend. I was being mathematically optimal. See, in conversations (and transformers), you don't give equal weight to every word. Some words matter more for understanding context. Attention figures out exactly HOW important each word should be. Here's the beautiful math: Attention(Q, K, V) = softmax(QK^T / √d_k)V Breaking it down: Q (Query): "What am I looking for?" K (Key): "What info is available?" V (Value): "What is that info?" d_k: Key dimension (for scaling) Think library analogy: You have a question (Query). Books have titles (Keys) and content (Values). Attention finds which books are most relevant. Step-by-step with "The cat sat on the mat": Step 1: Create Q, K, VEach word → three vectors via learned matrices W_Q, W_K, W_V For "cat": Query: "What should I attend to when processing 'cat'?" Key: "I am 'cat'" Value: "Here's cat info" Step 2: Calculate scoresQK^T = how much each word should attend to others Processing "sat"? High similarity with "cat" (cats sit) and "mat" (where sitting happens). Step 3: Scale by √d_kPrevents dot products from getting too large, keeps softmax balanced. Step 4: SoftmaxConverts scores to probabilities: "cat": 0.4 (subject) "sat": 0.3 (action) "mat": 0.2 (location) "on": 0.1 (preposition) "the": 0.1 (article) Step 5: Weight valuesMultiply each word's value by attention weight, sum up. Now "sat" knows it's most related to "cat" and "mat". Multi-Head Magic:Transformers do this multiple times in parallel: Head 1: Subject-verb relationships Head 2: Spatial ("on", "in", "under") Head 3: Temporal ("before", "after") Head 4: Semantic similarity Each head learns different relationship types. Why This Changed Everything: Before: RNNs = reading with flashlight (one word at a time, forget the beginning) After: Attention = floodlights on entire sentence with dimmer switches This is why ChatGPT can: Remember 50 messages ago Know "it" refers to something specific Understand "bank" = money vs river based on context The Kicker:Models learn these patterns from data alone. Nobody programmed grammar rules. It figured out language structure just by predicting next words. Attention is how AI learned to read between the lines. Just like my therapist helped me understand my focus patterns, maybe understanding transformers helps us see how we decide what matters. Now if only I could implement multi-head attention in dating... 🤖 Still waiting for "scaled dot-product listening" to be invented.

I rejected a job offer yesterday. Not because of the salary. Not because of the tech stack. Not even because of the long hours they warned me about. But because, when I asked how they evaluate their AI systems, the hiring manager said: "We just ask it some questions and see if the answers sound right." I stared at them for a moment and realized... They just described the biggest problem in AI today. See, "sounds right" isn't a measurement. It's a hope. Here's what proper LLM evaluation actually looks like: - Accuracy: Can it get factual questions right? (Not 80% of the time. Consistently.) - Hallucination rate: How often does it make things up? (This should be near zero for critical applications.) - Bias metrics: Does it treat all groups fairly? (Measured across demographics, not assumed.) Real Evaluation Frameworks: - BLEU scores for translation quality Perplexity for language modeling Human evaluation with inter-annotator agreement Adversarial testing (red teaming) Domain-specific benchmarks (legal, medical, financial) The Process: > Define success criteria BEFORE deployment > Create diverse test sets (not just happy paths) > Measure consistently across model versions > Track performance over time (models drift) Have humans validate edge cases Why This Matters: Before proper evals: "Our model is amazing!" (based on cherry-picked examples) After proper evals: "Our AI achieves 94.2% accuracy on domain X, with known failure modes Y and Z" The difference? One builds trust. The other destroys it when reality hits. The kicker: Most companies are still in the "sounds right" phase. They're deploying models evaluated by vibes, not metrics. Just like you wouldn't join a team that deploys code without tests, you shouldn't join one that deploys AI without proper evaluation. What's your experience with LLM evaluation? Are we measuring what actually matters?

software Engineers have a runway of 5 years left

"Just use OpenAI API" Until you need: - Custom fine-tuned models - <50ms p99 latency - $0.001/1K tokens (not $1.25/1K input) Then you build your own inference platform. Here's how to do that:

You're in a ML Engineer interview at Perplexity, and the interviewer asks: "Your RAG system is hallucinating in production. How do you diagnose what's broken - the retriever or the generator?" Here's how you can answer:

You’re in a AI Engineer interview at Microsoft, and the interviewer asks: ‘Our team needs to build RAG over 10M documents. Which vector database and why?’ Here’s how you answer:

"Just use Vector Database" Until you need: - 100M+ vectors indexed - <10ms p95 search latency - $50/month (not $500/month) Then you build your own vector database. Here's what that actually means:

“Just rent a GPU for training” Until you need: - Multi-node training for 70B+ models - $5/hour per GPU (not $30/hour) - 90%+ GPU utilization Then you build your own ml infra. Here’s the reality:

You're in an ML inference engineer interview at Anthropic, and the interviewer asks: "Can you explain speculative decoding and why we'd want to use it?" Here's how you can answer:

A girl at my gym approached me after her workout, clearly annoyed. "I've been watching and copying your entire routine for weeks, but I'm not seeing the same improvements you are!" I explained, "You can't just mimic what I do - you need to understand which exercises deserve more focus for your specific goals." She nodded. And then she said, "Wait, isn't that like attention mechanism in ChatGPT? " And I know you're sitting there like: WTF is Attention Mechanism? Attention Mechanism is like that gym bro who knows exactly which exercises deserve maximum effort during each workout. How does it work in LLMs? You feed a sentence with multiple words to the model Each word "examines" ALL other words in the sentence It calculates "how much attention should I pay to each word?" Creates weighted connections based on relevance Important words get higher attention scores, others get ignored The Complete Math: Step 1: Create Query, Key, and Value matrices Query (Q) = What am I looking for? Key (K) = What information is available? Value (V) = The actual content to extract For each word position i: Q_i = X_i × W_Q (input × query weight matrix) K_i = X_i × W_K (input × key weight matrix) V_i = X_i × W_V (input × value weight matrix) Step 2: Calculate Attention Scores Score(i,j) = Q_i × K_j^T This tells us how much word i should pay attention to word j. Step 3: Scale the scores Scaled_Score = Score / √d_k Where d_k is the dimension of the key vectors (prevents exploding gradients). Step 4: Apply Softmax Attention_Weight(i,j) = Softmax(Scaled_Score(i,j)) Softmax formula: e^(x_i) / Σ(e^(x_k)) for all k This ensures all attention weights sum to 1. Step 5: Weighted Sum Output_i = Σ(Attention_Weight(i,j) × V_j) for all j Complete Formula: Attention(Q,K,V) = Softmax(QK^T / √d_k)V Sentence: "She wants to deadlift heavy weights" Let's say we have 3-dimensional embeddings (simplified): Word Embeddings: She = [1, 0, 0] wants = [0, 1, 0] deadlift = [1, 1, 1] heavy = [0, 0, 1] weights = [1, 0, 1] When processing "deadlift": Query for "deadlift" = [1, 1, 1] Calculate dot products (attention scores): deadlift → She: [1,1,1] · [1,0,0] = 1 deadlift → wants: [1,1,1] · [0,1,0] = 1 deadlift → deadlift: [1,1,1] · [1,1,1] = 3 deadlift → heavy: [1,1,1] · [0,0,1] = 1 deadlift → weights: [1,1,1] · [1,0,1] = 2 Raw scores: [1, 1, 3, 1, 2] After Softmax: She: e^1/(e^1+e^1+e^3+e^1+e^2) = 0.04 wants: 0.04 deadlift: e^3/(total) = 0.66 heavy: 0.04 weights: e^2/(total) = 0.22 Final attention weights: [0.04, 0.04, 0.66, 0.04, 0.22] Multi-Head Attention (the gym analogy): Think of it like having multiple personal trainers, each focusing on different aspects: Head 1: Focuses on exercise form and technique Head 2: Focuses on muscle groups being targeted Head 3: Focuses on safety and proper progression Each head has its own Q, K, V matrices and calculates attention independently, then results are concatenated. Mathematical representation: MultiHead(Q,K,V) = Concat(head_1, head_2, ..., head_h) × W_O Where each head_i = Attention(QW_i^Q, KW_i^K, VW_i^V) Why this revolutionized NLP: > Context Understanding – Mathematical precision in determining word relationships > Parallel Processing – All attention scores calculated simultaneously, not sequentially > Gradient Flow – Softmax ensures smooth gradients for training > Scalability – Works efficiently with sequences of any length Final Result: Attention Mechanism gave AI mathematical precision in focusing on what matters - just like how you calculate exactly which muscle groups need the most work based on your goals!

You're in a ML Engineer interview at Anthropic, and the interviewer asks: "Your LLM inference is running out of GPU memory with long conversations. How do you fix this?" Here's how you answer: