open_llama VS sharegpt

The RedPajama dataset was adapted by the OpenLLaMA project at UC Berkeley, creating an open-source LLaMA equivalent without Meta’s restrictions. The model's later version also included data from Falcon and StarCoder. This highlights the importance of open-source models and datasets, enabling free repurposing and innovation.

OpenLLaMA is though. https://github.com/openlm-research/open_llama

All of these are surmountable problems.

We can beat OpenAI.

We can drain their moat.

#1: 🌞 Open-source Reproduction of Meta AI’s LLaMA OpenLLaMA-13B released. (trained for 1T tokens) | 0 comments #2: 🎉 #1 on HuggingFace.co's Leaderboard Model Falcon 40B is now Free (Apache 2.0 License) | 0 comments #3: 😍 Have you seen this repo? "running LLMs on consumer-grade hardware. compatible models: llama.cpp, alpaca.cpp, gpt4all.cpp, rwkv.cpp, whisper.cpp, vicuna, koala, gpt4all-j, cerebras and many others!" | 0 comments

Trained OpenLLaMA models are from the OpenLM Research team in collaboration with Stability AI: https://github.com/openlm-research/open_llama

I can't use Llama or any model from the Llama family, due to license restrictions. Although now there's also the OpenLlama family of models, which have the same architecture but were trained on an open dataset (RedPajama, the same dataset the base model in my app was trained on). I'd love to pursue the direction of extended context lengths for on-device LLMs. Likely in a month or so, when I've implemented all the product feature that I currently have on my backlog.

https://github.com/openlm-research/open_llama#update-0615202...).

XGen-7B is probably the superior 7B model, it's trained on more tokens and a longer default sequence length (although both presumably can adopt SuperHOT (Position Interpolation) to extend context), but larger models still probably perform better on an absolute basis.

Compare it to openllama. It github doesn't have a single script on how to do anything.

OpenLLaMA models up to 13B parameters have now been trained on 1T tokens:

https://github.com/openlm-research/open_llama

The deployed LLM binary, orca mini, has 3 billion parameters. Orca mini is based on the OpenLLaMA project.

OpenLM Research released its 1T token version of OpenLLaMA 13B - the permissively licensed open source reproduction of Meta AI's LLaMA large language model. [Details].

Vicuna is another instruction-focused LLM rooted in LLaMA, developed by researchers from UC Berkeley, Carnegie Mellon University, Stanford, and UC San Diego. They adapted Alpaca’s training code and incorporated 70,000 examples from ShareGPT, a platform for sharing ChatGPT interactions.

We can say that a 13B model per language is reasonable. Then it means we need to create a democratic way for teaching coding by examples and solutions and algorithms, that we create, curate and use open-source. Much like sharegpt.com but for coding tasks, solutions ways of thinking. We should be wary of 'enforcing' principles rather showing different approaches, as all approaches can have advantages and disadvantages.

You can see the url in the comment, https://sharegpt.com and if you go there it gives you the option for installing the chrome extension, after that it shouldn’t be hard to use it

ShareGPT - Share your prompts and your entire conversations

Or used https://sharegpt.com

you can gets lots of ideas here > https://sharegpt.com/ (180,000+ prompts)

I would love to read the whole conversation: Check out this cool little GPT sharing extension: https://sharegpt.com - that way the code snippets can be copied easily

> Cool, that’s really the only point I’m making.

To be clear, I'm saying that I don't know if they are, not that we know that it's not the same.

It's not at all clear that humans do much more than "that basic token sequence prediction" for our reasoning itself. There are glaringly obvious auxiliary differences, such as memory, but we just don't know how human reasoning works, so writing off a predictive mechanism like this is just as unjustified as assuming it's the same. It's highly likely there are differences, but whether they are significant remains to be seen.

> Not necessarily scaling limitations fundamental to the architecture as such, but limitations in our ability to develop sufficiently well developed training texts and strategies across so many problem domains.

I think there are several big issues with that thinking. One is that this constraint is an issue now in large part because GPT doesn't have "memory" or an ability to continue learning. Those two need to be overcome to let it truly scale, but once they are, the game fundamentally changes.

The second is that we're already at a stage where using LLMs to generate and validate training data works well for a whole lot of domains, and that will accelerate, especially when coupled with "plugins" and the ability to capture interactions with real-life users [1]

E.g. a large part of human ability to do maths with any kind of efficiency comes down to rote repetition and generating large sets of simple quizzes for such areas is near trivial if you combine an LLM at tools for it to validate its answers. And unlike with humans where we have to do this effort for billions of humans, once you have an ability to let these models continue learning you make this investment in training once (or once per major LLM effort).

A third is that GPT hasn't even scratched the surface in what is available in digital collections alone. E.g. GPT3 was trained on "only" about 200 million Norwegian words (I don't have data for GPT4). Norwegian is a tiny language - this was 0.1% of GPT3's total corpus. But the Norwegian National Library has 8.5m items, which includes something like 10-20 billion words in books alone, and many tens of billions more in newspapers, magazines and other data. That's one tiny language. We're many generations of LLM's away from even approaching exhausting the already available digital collections alone, and that's before we look at having the models trained on that data generate and judge training data.

[1] https://sharegpt.com/

of that conversation. Perhaps something like shareGPT[1] can help?

[1] https://sharegpt.com