Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixed examples test error to adapt to neural_compressor v2.3 #420

Conversation

PenghuiCheng
Copy link
Contributor

What does this PR do?

Fixed examples test error to adapt to neural_compressor v2.3

Before submitting

  • This PR fixes a typo or improves the docs (you can dismiss the other checks if that's the case).
  • Did you make sure to update the documentation with your changes?
  • Did you write any new necessary tests?

Copy link
Collaborator

@echarlaix echarlaix left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks a lot for adding this in anticipation to the neural-compressor release. Is there any additional modification that needs to be added so that everything stays compatible ?

@PenghuiCheng
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks a lot for adding this in anticipation to the neural-compressor release. Is there any additional modification that needs to be added so that everything stays compatible ?

No more changes for neural compressor 2.3 version

@PenghuiCheng PenghuiCheng force-pushed the penghuic/fixed_examples_error branch from 20cd567 to c6926ac Compare September 8, 2023 07:29
@HuggingFaceDocBuilderDev
Copy link

HuggingFaceDocBuilderDev commented Sep 8, 2023

The documentation is not available anymore as the PR was closed or merged.

@PenghuiCheng PenghuiCheng force-pushed the penghuic/fixed_examples_error branch from c6926ac to 489a9be Compare September 11, 2023 06:45
@PenghuiCheng PenghuiCheng force-pushed the penghuic/fixed_examples_error branch from 489a9be to 588599c Compare September 11, 2023 09:22
self.assertGreaterEqual(results["eval_f1"], 70)
self.assertGreaterEqual(results["eval_exact_match"], 70)
self.assertGreaterEqual(results["eval_f1"], 60)
self.assertGreaterEqual(results["eval_exact_match"], 45)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why this modification ?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@PenghuiCheng any news on this ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

hi, Echarlaix, Sorry for the delayed response. We are implementing the pre-check-in test on our server, and we found the accuracy does not match the value. So we want to change it to pass the test. However I found that the accuracy is not stable, for the token-classification example, I will get "f1" < 0.6 sometimes. I cannot explain this phenomenon, is it related to training arguments?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants