outlines VS langroid

> [2]: https://github.com/outlines-dev/outlines?tab=readme-ov-file#...

It's interesting as speech recognition has become more popular than ever through services like Alexa, and other iot devices support for OS speech recognition

Unfortunately most implementations (especially those that are iot focused) don't have very important features for robust speech recognition.

1. Ability to enable and disable a grammar

[4] https://github.com/outlines-dev/outlines/tree/main

The next step is defining how to guide generation. For this step, we'll use the Outlines library. Outlines is a library for controlling how tokens are generated. It applies logic to enforce schemas, regular expressions and/or specific output formats such as JSON.

No benchmarks, just my anecdotal experience trying to get local LLM's to respond with JSON. The method above works for my use case nearly 100% of the time. Other things I've tried (e.g. `outlines`[0]) are really slow or don't work at all. Would love to hear what others have tried!

0 - https://github.com/outlines-dev/outlines

As I was playing with the Outlines library (https://outlines-dev.github.io/outlines/), I discussed with my friend Maxime how funny it would be if we set up a way to pair LLMs in chess matches till one wins. The first time I tried it, it required substantial prompt engineering to get some of those LLMs to propose valid moves. Large language models can mostly stay focused and even play rather well; see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37616170 for example. However small language models aren't as easy to convince.

Some of those LLMs have seen very little chess notation and so after the first few opening moves there aren't any valid tactics, let alone strategy, so they would end up either repeating the same move, or hallucinate moves that are not valid (Kxe5, but there would be a queen on e5!)

Then Outlines came along and we could force them to pick valid moves with little cost! Maxime worked super fast and got a first version of this idea as a gradio space.

I think it is pretty fun to see the (mostly terrible, but otherwise valid) chess that those LLMs play. Maybe it will even be instructive to how we can create small LLMs that can play much better than the ones on the leaderboard.

Anyway, you can check it out here:

https://huggingface.co/spaces/mlabonne/chessllm

What is interactive about it: you can pick the LLMs from available models on HuggingFace (within reason, small LLMs are preferable so that the space does not crash) or push one of your own small models to HF and have it fight with others. At the end of the game the leaderboard is updated.

Hope you find it fun!

> The most obvious usage of this is forcing a model to output valid JSON

Isn't this something that Outlines [0], Guidance [1] and others [2] already solve much more elegantly?

0. https://github.com/outlines-dev/outlines

1. https://github.com/guidance-ai/guidance

2. https://github.com/sgl-project/sglang

And I think “just” Markdown doesn’t quite cut it for safe guidance. For example: directly generating content for your components. But I’m really excited about tooling like outlines appearing, with a greater focus on guided generation for structured data. Because this is often what we actually need!

It's pretty easy to force a locally running model to always output valid JSON: when it gives you probabilities for the next tokens, discard all tokens that would result in invalid JSON at that point (basically reverse parsing), and then apply the usual techniques to pick the completion only from the remaining tokens. You can even validate against a JSON schema that way, so long as it is simple enough.

There are a bunch of libraries for this already, e.g.: https://github.com/outlines-dev/outlines

https://github.com/outlines-dev/outlines/blob/7fae436345e621... squares with my experience using LLMs for anything real

  sequence = generator("Alice had 4 apples and Bob ate 2. Write an expression for Alice's apples:")

This was indeed true in the beginning, and I don’t know if this has changed. Inserting messages with Assistant role is crucial for many reasons, such as if you want to implement caching, or otherwise edit/compress a previous assistant response for cost or other reason.

At the time I implemented a work-around in Langroid[1]: since you can only insert a “user” role message, prepend the content with ASSISTANT: whenever you want it to be treated as an assistant role. This actually works as expected and I was able to do caching. I explained it in this forum:

https://community.openai.com/t/add-custom-roles-to-messages-...

[1] the Langroid code that adds a message with a given role, using this above “assistant spoofing trick”:

https://github.com/langroid/langroid/blob/main/langroid/agen...

Same question here. Ollama is fantastic as it makes it very easy to run models locally, But if you already have a lot of code that processes OpenAI API responses (with retry, streaming, async, caching etc), it would be nice to be able to simply switch the API client to Ollama, without having to have a whole other branch of code that handles Alama API responses. One way to do an easy switch is using the litellm library as a go-between but it’s not ideal (and I also recently found issues with their chat formatting for mistral models).

For an OpenAI compatible API my current favorite method is to spin up models using oobabooga TGW. Your OpenAI API code then works seamlessly by simply switching out the api_base to the ooba endpoint. Regarding chat formatting, even ooba’s Mistral formatting has issues[1] so I am doing my own in Langroid using HuggingFace tokenizer.apply_chat_template [2]

[1] https://github.com/oobabooga/text-generation-webui/issues/53...

[2] https://github.com/langroid/langroid/blob/main/langroid/lang...

Related question - I assume ollama auto detects and applies the right chat formatting template for a model?

we (like simpleaichat from OP) leverage Pydantic to specify the desired structured output, and under the hood Langroid translates it to either the OpenAI function-calling params or (for LLMs that don’t natively support fn-calling), auto-insert appropriate instructions into tje system-prompt. We call this mechanism a ToolMessage:

https://github.com/langroid/langroid/blob/main/langroid/agen...

We take this idea much further — you can define a method in a ChatAgent to “handle” the tool and attach the tool to the agent. For stateless tools you can define a “handle” method in the tool itself and it gets patched into the ChatAgent as the handler for the tool.

Many services/platforms are careless/disingenuous when they claim they “train” on your documents, where they actually mean they do RAG.

An under-appreciate benefit of RAG is the ability to have the LLM cite sources for its answers (which are in principle automatically/manually verifiable). You lose this citation ability when you finetune on your documents.

In Langroid (the Multi-Agent framework from ex-CMU/UW-Madison researchers) https://github.com/langroid/langroid

This resonates with the approach we’ve taken in Langroid (the Multi-Agent framework from ex-CMU/UW-Madison researchers): our DocChatAgent uses a combination of lexical and semantic retrieval, reranking and relevance extraction to improve precision and recall:

https://github.com/langroid/langroid/blob/main/langroid/agen...

In the Langroid library (a multi-agent framework from ex-CMU/UW-Madison researchers) we have these and more. For example here’s a script that combines web search and RAG:

https://github.com/langroid/langroid/blob/main/examples/docq...

Thanks, also found Langdroid: https://github.com/langroid/langroid/blob/main/README.md