fix_details_model_card

#11
by Leyo HF staff - opened
Files changed (1) hide show
  1. README.md +11 -11
README.md CHANGED
@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ The following screenshot is an example of interaction with the instructed model:
60
 
61
  # How to Get Started with the Model
62
 
63
- This [tutorial](https://github.com/huggingface/notebooks/pull/418/) shows a simple example to fine-tune IDEFICS on custom data. This [colab notebook](TODO) showcases how to do the fine-tuning in 4bits precision. TODO: change to the correct link once it's merged.
64
 
65
  We provide quick-start code for both the base and the instruct models.
66
 
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ for i, t in enumerate(generated_text):
139
 
140
  # Training Details
141
 
142
- ## IDEFICS base
143
 
144
  We closely follow the training procedure layed out in [Flamingo](https://huggingface.co/papers/2204.14198). We combine two open-source pre-trained models ([laion/CLIP-ViT-H-14-laion2B-s32B-b79K](https://huggingface.co/laion/CLIP-ViT-H-14-laion2B-s32B-b79K) and [huggyllama/llama-65b](https://huggingface.co/huggyllama/llama-65b)) by initializing new Transformer blocks. The pre-trained backbones are frozen while we train the newly initialized parameters.
145
 
@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ We start from the base IDEFICS models and fine-tune the models by unfreezing all
207
 
208
  We note that all these datasets were obtained by using ChatGPT/GPT-4 in one way or another.
209
 
210
- Additionally, we found it beneficial to include the pre-training data in the fine-tuning with the following sampling ratios: 5.1% of image-text pairs and 31.0 of multimodal web documents.
211
 
212
  The training objective is the standard next token prediction. We use the following hyper and training parameters:
213
  | Parameters | | IDEFICS-80b-instruct | IDEFICS-9b-instruct |
@@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ The training objective is the standard next token prediction. We use the followi
229
 
230
  # Evaluation
231
 
232
- ## IDEFICS base
233
 
234
  We follow the evaluation protocol of Flamingo and evaluate IDEFICS on a suite of downstream image-text benchmarks ranging from visual question answering to image captioning.
235
 
@@ -243,15 +243,15 @@ As opposed to Flamingo, we did not train IDEFICS on video-text pairs datasets, a
243
 
244
  We note that since IDEFICS was trained on PMD (which contains COCO), the evaluation numbers on COCO are not directly comparable with Flamingo and OpenFlamingo since they did not explicitely have this dataset in the training mixture. Additionally, Flamingo is trained with images of resolution 320 x 320 while IDEFICS and OpenFlamingo were trained with images of 224 x 224 resolution.
245
 
246
- | Model | Shots | <nobr>VQAv2<br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>OKVQA<br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>TextVQA<br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>VizWiz<br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>TextCaps<br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>Coco<br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>NoCaps<br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>Flickr<br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>VisDial<br>NDCG</nobr> | <nobr>HatefulMemes<br>ROC AUC</nobr> | <nobr>ScienceQA<br>acc.</nobr> | <nobr>RenderedSST2<br>acc.</nobr> | <nobr>Winoground<br>group (text/image)</nobr> |
247
  |:------------|--------:|---------------------:|---------------------:|-----------------------:|----------------------:|-------------------:|---------------:|-----------------:|-----------------:|-----------------:|-------------------------:|-----------------------:|--------------------------:|----------------------------------:|
248
- | IDEFICS 80B | 0 | 60.0 | 45.2 | 30.9 | 36.0 | 56.8 | 91.8 | 65.0 | 53.7 | 48.8 | 60.6 | 68.9 | 60.5 | 8.0 (18.75/22.5)|
249
  | | 4 | 63.6 | 52.4 | 34.4 | 40.4 | 72.7 | 110.3 | 99.6 | 73.7 | 48.4 | 57.8 | 58.9 | 66.6 | - |
250
  | | 8 | 64.8 | 55.1 | 35.7 | 46.1 | 77.6 | 114.3 | 105.7 | 76.6 | 47.9 | 58.2 | - | 67.8 | - |
251
  | | 16 | 65.4 | 56.8 | 36.3 | 48.3 | 81.4 | 116.6 | 107.0 | 80.1 | - | 55.8 | - | 67.7 | - |
252
  | | 32 | 65.9 | 57.8 | 36.7 | 50.0 | 82.7 | 116.6 | 107.5 | 81.1 | - | 52.5 | - | 67.3 | - |
253
  <br>
254
- | IDEFICS 9B | 0 | 50.9 | 38.4 | 25.9 | 35.5 | 25.4 | 46.0 | 36.8 | 27.3 | 48.7 | 51.7 | 44.2 | 61.8 | 5.0 (16.8/20.8) |
255
  | | 4 | 55.4 | 45.5 | 27.6 | 36.9 | 60.0 | 93.0 | 81.3 | 59.7 | 47.9 | 50.7 | 37.4 | 62.3 | - |
256
  | | 8 | 56.4 | 47.7 | 27.5 | 40.4 | 63.2 | 97.0 | 86.8 | 61.9 | 47.6 | 51.0 | - | 66.3 | - |
257
  | | 16 | 57.0 | 48.4 | 27.9 | 42.6 | 67.4 | 99.7 | 89.4 | 64.5 | - | 50.9 | - | 67.8 | - |
@@ -271,9 +271,9 @@ For ImageNet-1k, we also report results where the priming samples are selected t
271
 
272
  Similarly to the base IDEFICS models, we performed checkpoint selection to stop the training. Given that M3IT contains in the training set a handful of the benchmarks we were evaluating on, we used [MMBench](https://huggingface.co/papers/2307.06281) as a held-out validation benchmark to perform checkpoint selection. We select the checkpoint at step 3'000 for IDEFICS-80b-instruct and at step 8'000 for IDEFICS-9b-instruct.
273
 
274
- | Model | Shots | <nobr>VQAv2 <br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>OKVQA <br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>TextVQA <br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>VizWiz<br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>TextCaps <br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>Coco <br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>NoCaps<br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>Flickr<br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>VisDial <br>NDCG</nobr> | <nobr>HatefulMemes<br>ROC AUC</nobr> | <nobr>ScienceQA <br>acc.</nobr> | <nobr>RenderedSST2<br>acc.</nobr> | <nobr>Winoground<br>group (text/image)</nobr> |
275
  | :--------------------- | --------: | ---------------------: | ---------------------: | -----------------------: | ----------------------: | -------------------: | ---------------: | -----------------: | -----------------: | -----------------: | -------------------------: | -----------------------: | --------------------------: | ----------------------------------: |
276
- | Finetuning data does not contain dataset | - | &#10060; | &#10060; | &#10060; | &#10004; | &#10060; | &#10060; | &#10004; | &#10004; | &#10060; | &#10004; | &#10060; | &#10004; | &#10060; |
277
  | <nobr>IDEFICS 80B Instruct<br> | 0 | 37.4 (-22.7) | 36.9 (-8.2) | 32.9 (1.9) | 26.2 (-9.8) | 76.5 (19.7) | 117.2 (25.4) | 104.5 (39.5) | 65.3 (11.7) | 49.3 (0.4) | 58.9 (-1.7) | 69.5 (0.5) | 67.3 (6.8) | 9.2/20.0/25.0 (1.2/1.2/2.5) |
278
  | | 4 | 67.5 (4.0) | 54.0 (1.7) | 37.8 (3.5) | 39.8 (-0.7) | 71.7 (-1.0) | 116.9 (6.6) | 104.0 (4.4) | 67.1 (-6.6) | 48.9 (0.5) | 57.5 (-0.3) | 60.5 (1.6) | 65.5 (-1.1) | - |
279
  | | 8 | 68.1 (3.4) | 56.9 (1.8) | 38.2 (2.5) | 44.8 (-1.3) | 72.7 (-4.9) | 116.8 (2.5) | 104.8 (-0.9) | 70.7 (-5.9) | 48.2 (0.3) | 58.0 (-0.2) | - | 68.6 (0.8) | - |
@@ -286,6 +286,7 @@ Similarly to the base IDEFICS models, we performed checkpoint selection to stop
286
  | | 16 | 66.8 (9.8) | 51.7 (3.3) | 31.6 (3.7) | 44.8 (2.3) | 70.2 (2.7) | 128.8 (29.1) | 101.5 (12.2) | 75.8 (11.4) | - | 51.7 (0.7) | - | 63.3 (-4.6) | - |
287
  | | 32 | 66.9 (9.0) | 52.3 (2.7) | 32.0 (3.7) | 46.0 (2.2) | 71.7 (3.6) | 127.8 (29.8) | 101.0 (10.5) | 76.3 (11.9) | - | 50.8 (1.0) | - | 60.9 (-6.1) | - |
288
 
 
289
 
290
  # Technical Specifications
291
 
@@ -393,8 +394,7 @@ We release the additional weights we trained under an MIT license.
393
 
394
  # Model Card Authors
395
 
396
- V, i, c, t, o, r, ,, , S, t, a, s, ,, , X, X, X
397
-
398
  # Model Card Contact
399
 
400
  Please open a discussion on the Community tab!
 
60
 
61
  # How to Get Started with the Model
62
 
63
+ This [tutorial](https://github.com/huggingface/notebooks/pull/418/) shows a simple example to fine-tune IDEFICS on custom data. This [colab notebook](https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1o6hSdApDoaavkAXTI7clIG1ZWfJvwzRj?usp=sharing) showcases how to do the fine-tuning in 4bits precision. TODO: change to the correct link once it's merged.
64
 
65
  We provide quick-start code for both the base and the instruct models.
66
 
 
139
 
140
  # Training Details
141
 
142
+ ## IDEFICS
143
 
144
  We closely follow the training procedure layed out in [Flamingo](https://huggingface.co/papers/2204.14198). We combine two open-source pre-trained models ([laion/CLIP-ViT-H-14-laion2B-s32B-b79K](https://huggingface.co/laion/CLIP-ViT-H-14-laion2B-s32B-b79K) and [huggyllama/llama-65b](https://huggingface.co/huggyllama/llama-65b)) by initializing new Transformer blocks. The pre-trained backbones are frozen while we train the newly initialized parameters.
145
 
 
207
 
208
  We note that all these datasets were obtained by using ChatGPT/GPT-4 in one way or another.
209
 
210
+ Additionally, we found it beneficial to include the pre-training data in the fine-tuning with the following sampling ratios: 5.1% of image-text pairs and 30.7% of OBELICS multimodal web documents.
211
 
212
  The training objective is the standard next token prediction. We use the following hyper and training parameters:
213
  | Parameters | | IDEFICS-80b-instruct | IDEFICS-9b-instruct |
 
229
 
230
  # Evaluation
231
 
232
+ ## IDEFICS
233
 
234
  We follow the evaluation protocol of Flamingo and evaluate IDEFICS on a suite of downstream image-text benchmarks ranging from visual question answering to image captioning.
235
 
 
243
 
244
  We note that since IDEFICS was trained on PMD (which contains COCO), the evaluation numbers on COCO are not directly comparable with Flamingo and OpenFlamingo since they did not explicitely have this dataset in the training mixture. Additionally, Flamingo is trained with images of resolution 320 x 320 while IDEFICS and OpenFlamingo were trained with images of 224 x 224 resolution.
245
 
246
+ | Model | Shots | <nobr>VQAv2<br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>OKVQA<br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>TextVQA<br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>VizWiz<br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>TextCaps<br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>Coco<br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>NoCaps<br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>Flickr<br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>VisDial<br>NDCG</nobr> | <nobr>HatefulMemes<br>ROC AUC</nobr> | <nobr>ScienceQA<br>acc.</nobr> | <nobr>RenderedSST2<br>acc.</nobr> | <nobr>Winoground<br>group/text/image</nobr> |
247
  |:------------|--------:|---------------------:|---------------------:|-----------------------:|----------------------:|-------------------:|---------------:|-----------------:|-----------------:|-----------------:|-------------------------:|-----------------------:|--------------------------:|----------------------------------:|
248
+ | IDEFICS 80B | 0 | 60.0 | 45.2 | 30.9 | 36.0 | 56.8 | 91.8 | 65.0 | 53.7 | 48.8 | 60.6 | 68.9 | 60.5 | 8.0/18.75/22.5|
249
  | | 4 | 63.6 | 52.4 | 34.4 | 40.4 | 72.7 | 110.3 | 99.6 | 73.7 | 48.4 | 57.8 | 58.9 | 66.6 | - |
250
  | | 8 | 64.8 | 55.1 | 35.7 | 46.1 | 77.6 | 114.3 | 105.7 | 76.6 | 47.9 | 58.2 | - | 67.8 | - |
251
  | | 16 | 65.4 | 56.8 | 36.3 | 48.3 | 81.4 | 116.6 | 107.0 | 80.1 | - | 55.8 | - | 67.7 | - |
252
  | | 32 | 65.9 | 57.8 | 36.7 | 50.0 | 82.7 | 116.6 | 107.5 | 81.1 | - | 52.5 | - | 67.3 | - |
253
  <br>
254
+ | IDEFICS 9B | 0 | 50.9 | 38.4 | 25.9 | 35.5 | 25.4 | 46.0 | 36.8 | 27.3 | 48.7 | 51.7 | 44.2 | 61.8 | 5.0/16.8/20.8 |
255
  | | 4 | 55.4 | 45.5 | 27.6 | 36.9 | 60.0 | 93.0 | 81.3 | 59.7 | 47.9 | 50.7 | 37.4 | 62.3 | - |
256
  | | 8 | 56.4 | 47.7 | 27.5 | 40.4 | 63.2 | 97.0 | 86.8 | 61.9 | 47.6 | 51.0 | - | 66.3 | - |
257
  | | 16 | 57.0 | 48.4 | 27.9 | 42.6 | 67.4 | 99.7 | 89.4 | 64.5 | - | 50.9 | - | 67.8 | - |
 
271
 
272
  Similarly to the base IDEFICS models, we performed checkpoint selection to stop the training. Given that M3IT contains in the training set a handful of the benchmarks we were evaluating on, we used [MMBench](https://huggingface.co/papers/2307.06281) as a held-out validation benchmark to perform checkpoint selection. We select the checkpoint at step 3'000 for IDEFICS-80b-instruct and at step 8'000 for IDEFICS-9b-instruct.
273
 
274
+ | Model | Shots | <nobr>VQAv2 <br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>OKVQA <br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>TextVQA <br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>VizWiz<br>OE VQA acc.</nobr> | <nobr>TextCaps <br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>Coco <br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>NoCaps<br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>Flickr<br>CIDEr</nobr> | <nobr>VisDial <br>NDCG</nobr> | <nobr>HatefulMemes<br>ROC AUC</nobr> | <nobr>ScienceQA <br>acc.</nobr> | <nobr>RenderedSST2<br>acc.</nobr> | <nobr>Winoground<br>group/text/image</nobr> |
275
  | :--------------------- | --------: | ---------------------: | ---------------------: | -----------------------: | ----------------------: | -------------------: | ---------------: | -----------------: | -----------------: | -----------------: | -------------------------: | -----------------------: | --------------------------: | ----------------------------------: |
276
+ | Finetuning data **does not** contain the evaluation dataset | - | &#10006; | &#10006; | &#10006; | &#10004; | &#10006; | &#10006; | &#10006; | &#10004; | &#10006; | &#10004; | &#10006; | &#10004; | &#10006; |
277
  | <nobr>IDEFICS 80B Instruct<br> | 0 | 37.4 (-22.7) | 36.9 (-8.2) | 32.9 (1.9) | 26.2 (-9.8) | 76.5 (19.7) | 117.2 (25.4) | 104.5 (39.5) | 65.3 (11.7) | 49.3 (0.4) | 58.9 (-1.7) | 69.5 (0.5) | 67.3 (6.8) | 9.2/20.0/25.0 (1.2/1.2/2.5) |
278
  | | 4 | 67.5 (4.0) | 54.0 (1.7) | 37.8 (3.5) | 39.8 (-0.7) | 71.7 (-1.0) | 116.9 (6.6) | 104.0 (4.4) | 67.1 (-6.6) | 48.9 (0.5) | 57.5 (-0.3) | 60.5 (1.6) | 65.5 (-1.1) | - |
279
  | | 8 | 68.1 (3.4) | 56.9 (1.8) | 38.2 (2.5) | 44.8 (-1.3) | 72.7 (-4.9) | 116.8 (2.5) | 104.8 (-0.9) | 70.7 (-5.9) | 48.2 (0.3) | 58.0 (-0.2) | - | 68.6 (0.8) | - |
 
286
  | | 16 | 66.8 (9.8) | 51.7 (3.3) | 31.6 (3.7) | 44.8 (2.3) | 70.2 (2.7) | 128.8 (29.1) | 101.5 (12.2) | 75.8 (11.4) | - | 51.7 (0.7) | - | 63.3 (-4.6) | - |
287
  | | 32 | 66.9 (9.0) | 52.3 (2.7) | 32.0 (3.7) | 46.0 (2.2) | 71.7 (3.6) | 127.8 (29.8) | 101.0 (10.5) | 76.3 (11.9) | - | 50.8 (1.0) | - | 60.9 (-6.1) | - |
288
 
289
+ *() Improvement over non-instruct version.
290
 
291
  # Technical Specifications
292
 
 
394
 
395
  # Model Card Authors
396
 
397
+ Stas Bekman, Victor Sanh, Léo Tronchon, Hugo Laurençon
 
398
  # Model Card Contact
399
 
400
  Please open a discussion on the Community tab!