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

track evaluator errors from sdk #1079

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Nov 4, 2024
Merged

track evaluator errors from sdk #1079

merged 4 commits into from
Nov 4, 2024

Conversation

isahers1
Copy link
Contributor

@isahers1 isahers1 commented Oct 8, 2024

No description provided.

@@ -82,6 +84,27 @@
],
]

def extract_code_evaluator_feedback_keys(python_code: str) -> list[str]:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we commit to doing this, we'll need to handle case where you return EvaluationResult as well

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thanks for calling this out. Tried to handle all the cases I could think of:

  • return {"key":"foo","score":1} -> should extract ["foo"]
  • return {"score":1} -> should extract name of function
  • return EvaluationResult(...) should extract key from object
  • return EvaluationResults(results=...) should extract keys from all the EvaluationResults objects passed to 'results'. This case is harder, but it works for simple invocations.

@hinthornw hinthornw force-pushed the isaac/evaluatorerrors branch from df6864b to ba83c0a Compare October 9, 2024 22:32
@hinthornw hinthornw merged commit 13a5f70 into main Nov 4, 2024
7 of 9 checks passed
@hinthornw hinthornw deleted the isaac/evaluatorerrors branch November 4, 2024 17:47
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.

2 participants