poe-api VS llm-humaneval-benchmarks

Hi, I don't exactly get the whole calling this "situation" piracy if you would have used a bit more brain cells before saying that by checking my github page or even the discord server thoroughly, it would have been way appreciated, although I will take the time to explain regardless, this program works by using a website called poe.com to gain access to the models by a secure and tested GitHub project called 'poe-api' (already credited on my GitHub page and the program has been modified a bit to prevent/avoid some errors that my implimentation caused), then it uses tokens created from a discord server called FreeGPT-4 and integrates it into a python project (I have permission from the owner, and the person who is "paying" the bills), paying here is quoted since they are not paying for everyone to have access to this as it's most likely not possible, although since the owner has explicitly told not to disclose this information, I, unfortunately, cannot provide details as to how they create these tokens at bulk and not get flagged, although since this project has been up for a while and it has not faced legal actions, it is safe to use it. The final goal of this project is to be integrated as a library so that anyone can integrate it into their programs easily

Poe.com does not have a public API at this time although there are reverse engineered wrappers like this: https://github.com/ading2210/poe-api

You will want to look at HumanEval (https://github.com/abacaj/code-eval) and Eval+ (https://github.com/my-other-github-account/llm-humaneval-ben...) results for coding.

While Llama2 is an improvement over LLaMA v1, it's still nowhere near even the best open models (currently, sans test contamination, WizardCoder-15B, a StarCoder fine tune is at top). It's really not a competition atm though, ChatGPT-4 wipes the floor for coding atm.

Since I've been on a AI code-helper kick recently. According to the post, Claude 2 now 71.2%, a significant upgrade from 1.3 (56.0%). It isn't specified whether this is pass@1 or pass@10.

For comparison:

* GPT-4 claims 85.4 on HumanEval, in a recent paper https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.11366.pdf GPT-4 was tested at 80.1 pass@1 and 91 pass@1 using their Reflexion technique. They also include MBPP and Leetcode Hard benchmark comparisons

* WizardCoder, a StarCoder fine-tune is one of the top open models, scoring a 57.3 pass@1, model card here: https://huggingface.co/WizardLM/WizardCoder-15B-V1.0

* The best open model I know of atm is replit-code-instruct-glaive, a replit-code-3b fine tune, which scores a 63.5% pass@1. An independent developer abacaj has reproduced that announcement as part of code-eval, a repo for getting human-eval results: https://github.com/abacaj/code-eval

Those interested in this area may also want to take a look at this repo https://github.com/my-other-github-account/llm-humaneval-ben... that also ranks with Eval+, the CanAiCode Leaderboard https://huggingface.co/spaces/mike-ravkine/can-ai-code-resul... and airate https://github.com/catid/supercharger/tree/main/airate

Also, as with all LLM evals, to be taken with a grain of salt...

Liu, Jiawei, Chunqiu Steven Xia, Yuyao Wang, and Lingming Zhang. “Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generation.” arXiv, June 12, 2023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.01210.

To get an idea of programming performance, my can-ai-code Leaderboard is freshly updated this morning, but also check out the excellent llm-eval and code-eval leaderboards.

❗Note: In this study, we copy the scores for HumanEval and HumanEval+ from the LLM-Humaneval-Benchmarks. Notably, all the mentioned models generate code solutions for each problem utilizing a single attempt, and the resulting pass rate percentage is reported. Our WizardCoder generates answers using greedy decoding and tests with the same code.

I switched to RunPod from SageMaker in the middle of this process and boy am I happy I did. It is way cheaper and easier to scale for a project like this, and I highly recommend it. I have a set of tooling to run tests on it en masse now I am happy with - I will try to get my work up on the Github soon!: https://github.com/my-other-github-account/llm-humaneval-benchmarks

Also, my code I used for this eval is up at https://github.com/my-other-github-account/llm-humaneval-benchmarks/tree/8f3a77eb3508f33a88699aac1c4b10d5e3dc7de1