liboai VS nanoGPT

Imagine you have an AI-powered personal alerting chat assistant that interacts using up-to-date data. Whether it's a big move in the stock market that affects your investments, any significant change on your shared SharePoint documents, or discounts on Amazon you were waiting for, the application is designed to keep you informed and alert you about any significant changes based on the criteria you set in advance using your natural language. In this post, we will learn how to build a full-stack event-driven weather alert chat application in Python using pretty cool tools: Streamlit, NATS, and OpenAI. The app can collect real-time weather information, understand your criteria for alerts using AI, and deliver these alerts to the user interface.

1.OpenAI API

OpenAI Account – make an OpenAI Account here

Their big advantage is that they can quickly deal with data they’ve never seen before and scale. NVIDIA and Open AI are currently leading providers of such technologies. Read more.

You need an API key https://openai.com/api

To run ChatGPT, you need access to OpenAI’s API3, which provides a cloud-based platform for interacting with various models, including ChatGPT. You can sign up for an account and request access to the API here: https://openai.com/api/

To get started, go to OpenAI and create an account. After that, click on your profile on the top right corner, and select view API keys.

As far as I know the ChatGPT API isn’t public yet. However you can use the GPT3 version from OpenAI which do have an API you can connect to. The Davinci-003 text model is pretty damn good. https://openai.com/api/ for more info

GPT-3: GPT-3 is an advanced language generation model developed by OpenAI. It is capable of generating high-quality human-like text with a high degree of coherence and coherence. The model has been trained on a vast corpus of text, making it capable of generating text across a range of topics. GPT-3 can be used for a variety of content creation tasks such as blog posts, articles, and social media updates. One of the most significant advantages of using GPT-3 is that it can save a significant amount of time when creating content. The model can generate text much faster than a human writer, and the output can be used as a starting point for further refinement.

Nice work! I built something similar years ago and I did compile the probabilities based on a corpus of text (public domain books) in an attempt to produce writing in the style of various authors. The results were actually quite similar to the output of nanoGPT[0]. It was very unoptimized and everything was kept in memory. I also knew nothing about embeddings at the time and only a little about NLP techniques that would certainly have helped. Using a graph database would have probably been better than the datastructure I came up with at the time. You should look into stuff like Datalog, Tries[1], and N-Triples[2] for more inspiration.

You're idea of splitting the probabilities based on whether you're starting the sentence or finishing it is interesting but you might be able to benefit from an approach that creates a "window" of text you can use for lookup, using an LCS[3] algorithm could do that. There's probably a lot of optimization you could do based on the probabilities of different sequences, I think this was the fundamental thing I was exploring in my project.

Seeing this has inspired me further to consider working on that project again at some point.

[0] https://github.com/karpathy/nanoGPT

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trie

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-Triples

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_common_subsequence

where x1 denotes the 1st token, x2 denotes the 2nd token and so on, respectively.

I understand the conditional terms p(x_n|...) where we use cross-entropy to calculate their losses. However, I'm unsure about the probability of the very first token p(x1). How is it calculated? Is it in some configurations of the training process, or in the model architecture, or in the loss function?

IMHO, if the model doesn't learn p(x1) properly, the entire formula for Bayes' rule cannot be completed, and we can't refer to LLMs as "truly generative". Am I missing something here?

I asked the same question on nanoGPT repo: https://github.com/karpathy/nanoGPT/issues/432, but I haven't found the answer I'm looking for yet. Could someone please enlighten me.

This repo, albeit "old" in regards to how much progress there's been in LLMs, has great simple tutorials right there eg. fine-tuning GPT2 with Shakespeare: https://github.com/karpathy/nanoGPT

For training from scratch, maybe a small model like https://github.com/karpathy/nanoGPT or tinyllama. Perhaps with quantization.

It does remind me of a project [1] Andrej Karpathy did, writing a neural network and training code in ~600 lines (although networks have easier logic to code than a compiler).

[1] https://github.com/karpathy/nanoGPT

But I'm still not convinced that it can't in theory. Maybe the training set or transformer size I'm using is too small. I'm using nanoGPT implementation (https://github.com/karpathy/nanoGPT) with layers 24, heads 12, and embeddings per head 32. I'm using character-based vocab: every digit is a separate token, +, = and EOL.

https://github.com/karpathy/nanoGPT/blob/f08abb45bd2285627d1...

At training time, probabilities for the next token are computed for each position, so if we feed in a sequence of n tokens, we basically get n training examples, one for each position, but at inference time, we only compute the next token since we’ve already output the preceding ones.

And there are a bunch of other efforts at making training more efficient. Here's a cool model by Karpathy (OpenAI/used to head up Tesla's efforts): https://github.com/karpathy/nanoGPT

Just being a part of any auto-regressive system does not contradict his statement.

Go look at the GPT training code, here is the exact line: https://github.com/karpathy/nanoGPT/blob/master/train.py#L12...

The model is only trained to predict the next token. The training regime is purely next-token prediction. There is no loopiness whatsoever here, strange or ordinary.

Just because you take that feedforward neural network and wrap it in a loop to feed it its own output does not change the architecture of the neural net itself. The neural network was trained in one direction and runs in one direction. Hofstadter is surprised that such an architecture yields something that looks like intelligence.

He specifically used the correct term "feedforward" to constrast with recurrent neural networks, which GPT is not: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feedforward_neural_network

Does anyone have or know of an example implementation in plain pytorch, not huggingface transformers. Like something you could plug into https://github.com/karpathy/nanoGPT ?