this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2023
21 points (100.0% liked)
LocalLLaMA
3111 readers
35 users here now
Welcome to LocalLLaMA! Here we discuss running and developing machine learning models at home. Lets explore cutting edge open source neural network technology together.
Get support from the community! Ask questions, share prompts, discuss benchmarks, get hyped at the latest and greatest model releases! Enjoy talking about our awesome hobby.
As ambassadors of the self-hosting machine learning community, we strive to support each other and share our enthusiasm in a positive constructive way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, I haven't and I don't intend to because I wouldn't get anything out if the exercise. I don't (yet?) have a deep enough model to inform comparisons with anything other than different parameter sizes of the same pre-trained models of the Meta LLAMA foundation model. What I posted was basically the results of a proof-of-method. Now that I have some confidence that the responses aren't simply random, I guess the next step would be to run the method over the 7B/13B/30B models for i) vicuna and ii) wizard-vicuna which, AFAICT are the only pre-trained models that have been published with all three 7, 13 and 30 sizes.
It's not possible to get the foundation model to respond to OCEAN tests but on such a large and disparate training set, a broad “neural” on everything would be expected, just from the stats. In consequence, the results I posted are likely to be artefacts arising from the pre-training - it's plausible (to me) that the relatively-elevated Agreeableness and Conscientiousness are elevated as a result of explicit training and I can see how Neuroticism, Extroversion and Openness might not be similary affected.
In terms of the comparison between model parameter sizes, I have yet to run those tests and will report back when I have done.