openai-cookbook VS guidance

A pretrained LLM is a closed-book system: It can only access information that it was trained on. With domain fine-tuning, the system manifests additional material. An early prototype of this technique was shown in this OpenAi cookbook: For the target domain, text was embedded using an API, and then when using the LLM, embeddings were retrieved using semantic similarity search to formulate an answer. Although this approach evolved to retrieval-augmented generation, its still a technique to adapt a Gen2 (2020) or Gen3 (2022) LLM into a question-answering system.

https://github.com/openai/openai-cookbook/blob/main/examples...

It sounds like you are trying to tweak embeddings for similarity search. Rather than fine-tune the model's layers, you may want to try training a linear transformation the existing model's output embedding. Openai has a cookbook on how to do that. You will need some data though - but I think you can try it with ~20 pieces of synthetically generated data.

tutorial from OpenAI https://github.com/openai/openai-cookbook/blob/main/examples/Question_answering_using_embeddings.ipynb

OpenAI Cookbook

OpenAI community repo with lots of examples: https://github.com/openai/openai-cookbook

This IS Microsoft Guidance, they seem to have spun off a separate GitHub organization for it.

https://github.com/microsoft/guidance redirects to https://github.com/guidance-ai/guidance now.

... and it sets the value of "armor" to "leather" so that you can use that value later in your code if you wish to. Guidance is pretty powerful, but I find the grammar hard to work with. I think the idea of being able to upload a bit of code or a context-free grammar to guide the model is super smart.

https://github.com/microsoft/guidance/blob/d2c5e3cbb730e337b...

Here's one thing I don't get.

Why all the rigamarole of hoping you get a valid response, adding last-mile validators to detect invalid responses, trying to beg the model to pretty please give me the syntax I'm asking for...

...when you can guarantee a valid JSON syntax by only sampling tokens that are valid? Instead of greedily picking the highest-scoring token every time, you select the highest-scoring token that conforms to the requested format.

This is what Guidance does already, also from Microsoft: https://github.com/microsoft/guidance

But OpenAI apparently does not expose the full scores of all tokens, it only exposes the highest-scoring token. Which is so odd, because if you run models locally, using Guidance is trivial, and you can guarantee your json is correct every time. It's faster to generate, too!

Perhaps something as simple as stating it was first built around OpenAI models and later expanded to local via plugins?

I've been meaning to ask you, have you seen/used MS Guidance[0] 'language' at all? I don't know if it's the right abstraction to interface as a plugin with what you've got in llm cli but there's a lot about Guidance that seems incredibly useful to local inference [token healing and acceleration especially].

[0]https://github.com/microsoft/guidance

LangChain is just too much, personal solutions are great, until you need to compare metrics or methodologies of prompt generation. Then the onus is on these n-parties who are sharing their resources to ensure that all of them used the same templates, they were generated the same way, with the only diff being the models these prompts were run on.

So maybe a simpler library like Microsoft's Guidance (https://github.com/microsoft/guidance)? It does this really well.

I am unclear on the status of the project but here is the conversation that seem to be tracking it: https://github.com/microsoft/guidance/discussions/201

Let's have a subreddit about Guidance!

You should look at guidance for an LLM to fill out a template. Define the output data structure and provide the real estate listing in the context (see the JSON template example here https://github.com/microsoft/guidance)