Just wondering if anyone has any suggestions to keep things moving and growing, was thinking of doing a daily quantized models post just for keeping up with the bloke, thoughts?

  • cll7793@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    The best way to grow a community is to share the highest quality information possible. The reason I actually stopped being a lurker is because another Lemmy user told me this.

    I want to see Lemmy and LocalLLaMA grow. If you can make the content here so good that others seek out our posts for information, then the community will naturally grow.

    • noneabove1182@sh.itjust.worksOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yup I’m trying to be way more active than I ever was on Reddit for the same reason, want to make sure there’s quality stuff for people to interact with

  • Graham Higgins@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    was thinking of doing a daily quantized models post just for keeping up with the bloke

    Wouldn’t go amiss.

    The best way to grow a community is to share the highest quality information possible. The reason I actually stopped being a lurker is because another Lemmy user told me this.

    Okay, point taken. I’ve been guilty of lurking inappropriately and I can model the consequences of that.

    I have a reasonable amount of direct experience of purposeful llama.cpp use with 7B/13B/30B models to offer. And there’s a context - I’m exploring its potential role in the generation of content, supporting a sci-fi web comic project - hardly groundbreaking, I know but I’m hoping it’ll help me create something outside the box.

    For additional context, I’m a cognitive psychologist by discipline and a cognitive scientist by profession (now retired) and worked in classic AI back in the day.

    Over on TheBloke’s discord server, I’ve been exposing the results of a small variety of pre-trained LLM models’ responses to the 50 questions of the OCEAN personality questionnaire, presented 25 times to each - just curious to see whether there was any kind of a reliable pattern emerging from the pre-training:

    OCEAN questionnaire

    OCEAN questionnaire full-size jpeg

    Looks like the larger models enable a wider range of responses, I guess that’s an expected consequence of a smoother manifold.

    Happy to answer any questions that people may have and will be posting more in future.

    Cheers, Graham

    • noneabove1182@sh.itjust.worksOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would love to see more of this and maybe making it its own post for more traction and discussion, do you have a link to those pictures elsewhere? can’t seem to get a large version loaded on desktop haha.

      • Graham Higgins@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I edited the post to include a link to the discord image. If there’s interest I can make a post with more details (I used Python’s pexpect to communicate with a spawned llama.cpp process).

      • Graham Higgins@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, I haven’t and I don’t intend to because I wouldn’t get anything out if the exercise. I don’t (yet?) have a deep enough model to inform comparisons with anything other than different parameter sizes of the same pre-trained models of the Meta LLAMA foundation model. What I posted was basically the results of a proof-of-method. Now that I have some confidence that the responses aren’t simply random, I guess the next step would be to run the method over the 7B/13B/30B models for i) vicuna and ii) wizard-vicuna which, AFAICT are the only pre-trained models that have been published with all three 7, 13 and 30 sizes.

        It’s not possible to get the foundation model to respond to OCEAN tests but on such a large and disparate training set, a broad “neural” on everything would be expected, just from the stats. In consequence, the results I posted are likely to be artefacts arising from the pre-training - it’s plausible (to me) that the relatively-elevated Agreeableness and Conscientiousness are elevated as a result of explicit training and I can see how Neuroticism, Extroversion and Openness might not be similary affected.

        In terms of the comparison between model parameter sizes, I have yet to run those tests and will report back when I have done.

  • cll7793@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I personally don’t mind! If you find some models you think are interesting to share, go for it!