LM-SimBench: A Unified Framework, Dataset, and Benchmark for Large Language Model Training Simulation
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-core · Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.
Evaluating candidate parallelization strategies through distributed training runs makes strategy selection prohibitively expensive at scale. Performance simulation offers a lower cost alternative, yet controlled comparisons among existing simulators remain difficult because they differ in the training stages they model and the workloads on which they are evaluated. We introduce LM-SimBench, a unified framework, profiling dataset, and benchmark for evaluating LLM training simulators. The framework decomposes simulation into functional stages from model compilation to schedule level aggregation, connecting execution representations and cost estimators to measurable evaluation targets. Following this framework, we profile 23 model settings from 10 dense and Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) LLM families on an Ascend Neural Processing Unit (NPU) cluster. The resulting dataset contains 348 feasible configurations that jointly vary five parallelism dimensions and activation recomputation, with six views spanning configuration, rank, operator, event, and kernel granularity. Evaluations of representative training simulators demonstrate how LM-SimBench supports comparisons of prediction accuracy, assessment of configuration selection, and diagnosis of prediction errors. Matched GPU-NPU experiments validate the cross-platform applicability of the collection and evaluation protocol and demonstrate NPU-guided GPU configuration selection.
Results and benchmarks
Evaluating candidate parallelization strategies through distributed training runs makes strategy selection prohibitively expensive at scale.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scientific computing | Qwen3-0.6B | Rank-mem. | 15.99 | paper-derived |
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure below.
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 95/100, grounding 68/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Datasets
Spaces
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
Scientific computing
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Natural Language Processing, Large Language Models
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.