Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

wendten t1_jdfh6ya wrote

best is a very vague term. Do you have access to a gpu cluster, or do you plan to run it on an office laptop. However id say the Alpaca model would be a good candidate. you can follow their guidance and make your own custom model from one of metas Llama models

7

to4life4 OP t1_jdfhhup wrote

"Best" I suppose meaning closest to the latest ChatGPT on the usual benchmarks.

First on my own gpu to test (3080ti), then on a cluster if I can prove out the concept.

Thanks I'll definitely look into Alpaca. It can be customized to work with human ratings of generated output?

1

zxyzyxz t1_jdfumii wrote

Alpaca is not open source, and neither is LLaMA. The only good open source one I know is OpenAssistant.

10

NoBoysenberry9711 t1_jdgh2lu wrote

I would love to put a pdf of a text book I own into a model and then know its super focused on that text book and wouldn't just make stuff up.

0

hassan789_ t1_jdgl6v5 wrote

Flan-T5 should be top of your list as well

2

Llukas88 t1_jdilkns wrote

There are Alpaca finetuned versions of Bloom or BloomZ on huggingface, maybe try those. Another option would be the Chat version of GPTNeoX from OpenChatKit. Both should be Open Source and free to use.

3

Llukas88 t1_jdimn2w wrote

The Alpaca model based on LLaMa isnt. The dataset, which is also called Alpaca is. If you train Bloom, which uses a permissive license, on this dataset, the Bloom license is applied to your finetuned model and you should be able to use it commercially.

2

Llukas88 t1_jdiohwe wrote

Not any i know of, played around today with Alphacoom (https://huggingface.co/mrm8488/Alpacoom) and got pretty Bad results then tried a BloomZ version (https://huggingface.co/mrm8488/bloomz-7b1-mt-ft-alpaca) and got results similar to the Alpaca-Native model. Maybe read the BloomZ paper it should be a pretty good basis to build a chat model, rest should depend on your Training approach and Data.

3

RedditLovingSun t1_jdipxex wrote

They aren't open source but didn't Stanford release their code and self instruct training data that's supposedly only $600 to train? I honestly don't know but how enforceable is llamas "no using it for business" clause after someone augments one of their models with Lora and trains weights on self instruct?

2