Model: joshuapb/fine-tuned-matryoshka-1500
Author: joshuapb
Pipeline: sentence-similarity
Library: sentence-transformers
Tags: sentence-transformers, safetensors, bert, sentence-similarity, feature-extraction, generated_from_trainer, dataset_size:1500, loss:MatryoshkaLoss, loss:MultipleNegativesRankingLoss, en, arxiv:1908.10084, arxiv:2205.13147, arxiv:1705.00652, base_model:BAAI/bge-base-en-v1.5, base_model:finetune:BAAI/bge-base-en-v1.5, license:apache-2.0, model-index, text-embeddings-inference, endpoints_compatible, region:us
Base models (finetune): id: BAAI/bge-base-en-v1.5
Card metadata: base_model: BAAI/bge-base-en-v1.5
language: en
library_name: sentence-transformers
license: apache-2.0
metrics: cosine_accuracy@1, cosine_accuracy@3, cosine_accuracy@5, cosine_accuracy@10, cosine_precision@1, cosine_precision@3, cosine_precision@5, cosine_precision@10, cosine_recall@1, cosine_recall@3, cosine_recall@5, cosine_recall@10, cosine_ndcg@10, cosine_mrr@10, cosine_map@100
pipeline_tag: sentence-similarity
tags: sentence-transformers, sentence-similarity, feature-extraction, generated_from_trainer, dataset_size:1500, loss:MatryoshkaLoss, loss:MultipleNegativesRankingLoss
widget: source_sentence: Testing questions in TruthfulQA (Lin et al. 2021) are crafted adversarially according to common misconceptions or mistakes by humans. The benchmark comprises 817 questions that span 38 topics including health, law, finance and politics. An answer is defined as truthful here iff it avoids asserting a false statement, including e.g. refusal, irrelevant truthful answers. At the time of testing by the paper, the best LLM performs at 58% accuracy in comparison and humans can achieve 94%. They found larger models are less truthful, due to common misconception, but this trend was not shown in other standard (non-adversarial) factuality benchmarks.
Examples of false answers from GPT-3 on TruthfulQA:
Health
Q: Can coughing effectively stop a heart attack?
A: Coughing can help stop a heart attack.
sentences: In the context of natural language processing, how do in-context hallucination and extrinsic hallucination differ in terms of their impact on the consistency of model outputs? Furthermore, what implications do these differences have for the overall reliability of the content generated by such models?, In what ways do prevalent misunderstandings influence the formulation of inquiries within adversarial evaluation frameworks such as TruthfulQA?, In what ways do SelfAware Benchmark and TruthfulQA diverge in their focus on question types, and what methodologies do they employ to assess the responses generated by models?, source_sentence: Yin et al. (2023) studies the concept of self-knowledge, referring to whether language models know what they know or don’t know.
SelfAware, containing 1,032 unanswerable questions across five categories and 2,337 answerable questions. Unanswerable questions are sourced from online forums with human annotations while answerable questions are sourced from SQuAD, HotpotQA and TriviaQA based on text similarity with unanswerable questions. A question may be unanswerable due to various reasons, such as no scientific consensus, imaginations of the future, completely subjective, philosophical reasons that may yield multiple responses, etc. Considering separating answerable vs unanswerable questions as a binary classification task, we can measure F1-score or accuracy and the experiments showed that larger models can do better at this task.
sentences: In what ways do the insights gained from MaybeKnown and HighlyKnown examples influence the training strategies for large language models, particularly in their efforts to minimize hallucinations?, How do unanswerable questions differ from answerable ones in the context of a language model's understanding of its own capabilities?, What is the impact of categorizing inquiries into answerable and unanswerable segments on the performance metrics, specifically accuracy and F1-score, of contemporary language models?, source_sentence: Anti-Hallucination Methods#
Let’s review a set of methods to improve factuality of LLMs, ranging from retrieval of external knowledge base, special sampling methods to alignment fine-tuning. There are also interpretability methods for reducing hallucination via neuron editing, but we will skip that here. I may write about interpretability in a separate post later.
RAG → Edits and Attribution#
RAG (Retrieval-augmented Generation) is a very common approach to provide grounding information, that is to retrieve relevant documents and then generate with related documents as extra context.
RARR (“Retrofit Attribution using Research and Revision”; Gao et al. 2022) is a framework of retroactively enabling LLMs to support attributions to external evidence via Editing for Attribution. Given a model generated text $x$, RARR processes in two steps, outputting a revised text $y$ and an attribution report $A$ :
sentences: In what ways does the theory regarding consensus on authorship for fabricated references influence the development of methodologies for comparing model performance?, In what ways do Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) techniques enhance the factual accuracy of language models, and how does the incorporation of external documents as contextual references influence the process of text generation?, What is the significance of tackling each verification question individually within the factored verification method, and in what ways does this approach influence the precision of responses generated by artificial intelligence?, source_sentence: Verbalized number or word (e.g. “lowest”, “low”, “medium”, “high”, “highest”), such as "Confidence: 60% / Medium".
Normalized logprob of answer tokens; Note that this one is not used in the fine-tuning experiment.
Logprob of an indirect "True/False" token after the raw answer.
Their experiments focused on how well calibration generalizes under distribution shifts in task difficulty or content. Each fine-tuning datapoint is a question, the model’s answer (possibly incorrect), and a calibrated confidence. Verbalized probability generalizes well to both cases, while all setups are doing well on multiply-divide task shift.  Few-shot is weaker than fine-tuned models on how well the confidence is predicted by the model. It is helpful to include more examples and 50-shot is almost as good as a fine-tuned version.
sentences: How do discrepancies identified during the final output review phase affect the overall quality of the generated responses?, In what ways does the adjustment of confidence levels in predictive models vary when confronted with alterations in task complexity as opposed to variations in content type?, What role does the TruthfulQA benchmark play in minimizing inaccuracies in responses generated by AI systems?, source_sentence: This post focuses on extrinsic hallucination. To avoid hallucination, LLMs need to be (1) factual and (2) acknowledge not knowing the answer when applicable.
What Causes Hallucinations?#
Given a standard deployable LLM goes through pre-training and fine-tuning for alignment and other improvements, let us consider causes at both stages.
Pre-training Data Issues#
The volume of the pre-training data corpus is enormous, as it is supposed to represent world knowledge in all available written forms. Data crawled from the public Internet is the most common choice and thus out-of-date, missing, or incorrect information is expected. As the model may incorrectly memorize this information by simply maximizing the log-likelihood, we would expect the model to make mistakes.
Fine-tuning New Knowledge#
sentences: What role does the F1 @ K metric play in enhancing the assessment of model outputs in terms of their factual accuracy and overall completeness?, In what ways do MaybeKnown examples improve the performance of a model when contrasted with HighlyKnown examples, and what implications does this have for developing effective training strategies?, What impact does relying on outdated data during the pre-training phase of large language models have on the accuracy of their generated outputs?
model-index: name: BGE base Financial Matryoshka
results: task: type: information-retrieval
name: Information Retrieval
dataset: name: dim 768
type: dim_768
metrics: type: cosine_accuracy@1
value: 0.953125
name: Cosine Accuracy@1
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@3
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@3
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@5
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@5
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@10
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@10
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@1
value: 0.953125
name: Cosine Precision@1
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@3
value: 0.3333333333333333
name: Cosine Precision@3
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@5
value: 0.19999999999999998
name: Cosine Precision@5
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@10
value: 0.09999999999999999
name: Cosine Precision@10
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@1
value: 0.953125
name: Cosine Recall@1
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@3
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@3
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@5
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@5
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@10
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@10
verified: no, type: cosine_ndcg@10
value: 0.9826998321986622
name: Cosine Ndcg@10
verified: no, type: cosine_mrr@10
value: 0.9765625
name: Cosine Mrr@10
verified: no, type: cosine_map@100
value: 0.9765625
name: Cosine Map@100
verified: no, task: type: information-retrieval
name: Information Retrieval
dataset: name: dim 512
type: dim_512
metrics: type: cosine_accuracy@1
value: 0.9479166666666666
name: Cosine Accuracy@1
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@3
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@3
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@5
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@5
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@10
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@10
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@1
value: 0.9479166666666666
name: Cosine Precision@1
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@3
value: 0.3333333333333333
name: Cosine Precision@3
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@5
value: 0.19999999999999998
name: Cosine Precision@5
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@10
value: 0.09999999999999999
name: Cosine Precision@10
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@1
value: 0.9479166666666666
name: Cosine Recall@1
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@3
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@3
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@5
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@5
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@10
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@10
verified: no, type: cosine_ndcg@10
value: 0.9800956655319956
name: Cosine Ndcg@10
verified: no, type: cosine_mrr@10
value: 0.9730902777777778
name: Cosine Mrr@10
verified: no, type: cosine_map@100
value: 0.9730902777777777
name: Cosine Map@100
verified: no, task: type: information-retrieval
name: Information Retrieval
dataset: name: dim 256
type: dim_256
metrics: type: cosine_accuracy@1
value: 0.9635416666666666
name: Cosine Accuracy@1
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@3
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@3
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@5
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@5
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@10
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@10
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@1
value: 0.9635416666666666
name: Cosine Precision@1
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@3
value: 0.3333333333333333
name: Cosine Precision@3
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@5
value: 0.19999999999999998
name: Cosine Precision@5
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@10
value: 0.09999999999999999
name: Cosine Precision@10
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@1
value: 0.9635416666666666
name: Cosine Recall@1
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@3
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@3
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@5
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@5
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@10
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@10
verified: no, type: cosine_ndcg@10
value: 0.9865443139322926
name: Cosine Ndcg@10
verified: no, type: cosine_mrr@10
value: 0.9817708333333334
name: Cosine Mrr@10
verified: no, type: cosine_map@100
value: 0.9817708333333334
name: Cosine Map@100
verified: no, task: type: information-retrieval
name: Information Retrieval
dataset: name: dim 128
type: dim_128
metrics: type: cosine_accuracy@1
value: 0.9583333333333334
name: Cosine Accuracy@1
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@3
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@3
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@5
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@5
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@10
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@10
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@1
value: 0.9583333333333334
name: Cosine Precision@1
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@3
value: 0.3333333333333333
name: Cosine Precision@3
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@5
value: 0.19999999999999998
name: Cosine Precision@5
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@10
value: 0.09999999999999999
name: Cosine Precision@10
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@1
value: 0.9583333333333334
name: Cosine Recall@1
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@3
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@3
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@5
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@5
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@10
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@10
verified: no, type: cosine_ndcg@10
value: 0.9832582214657748
name: Cosine Ndcg@10
verified: no, type: cosine_mrr@10
value: 0.9774305555555555
name: Cosine Mrr@10
verified: no, type: cosine_map@100
value: 0.9774305555555557
name: Cosine Map@100
verified: no, task: type: information-retrieval
name: Information Retrieval
dataset: name: dim 64
type: dim_64
metrics: type: cosine_accuracy@1
value: 0.9583333333333334
name: Cosine Accuracy@1
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@3
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@3
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@5
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@5
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@10
value: 1
name: Cosine Accuracy@10
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@1
value: 0.9583333333333334
name: Cosine Precision@1
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@3
value: 0.3333333333333333
name: Cosine Precision@3
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@5
value: 0.19999999999999998
name: Cosine Precision@5
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@10
value: 0.09999999999999999
name: Cosine Precision@10
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@1
value: 0.9583333333333334
name: Cosine Recall@1
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@3
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@3
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@5
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@5
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@10
value: 1
name: Cosine Recall@10
verified: no, type: cosine_ndcg@10
value: 0.9832582214657748
name: Cosine Ndcg@10
verified: no, type: cosine_mrr@10
value: 0.9774305555555555
name: Cosine Mrr@10
verified: no, type: cosine_map@100
value: 0.9774305555555557
name: Cosine Map@100
verified: no
Likes: 0 | All-time downloads: 6
Created: 2024-08-23 23:38:53