Update README.md
Browse files
README.md
CHANGED
@@ -18,26 +18,21 @@ The primary purpose of this fine-tuned model is to perform sentiment analysis on
|
|
18 |
This section outlines the performance of the model on the sentiment analysis task using the IMDb movie reviews dataset, both before and after the fine-tuning process. The results highlight the effectiveness of fine-tuning in enhancing model accuracy and generalization.
|
19 |
|
20 |
Pre-Fine-Tuning Evaluation:
|
21 |
-
|
22 |
Before fine-tuning, the model was evaluated on the IMDb dataset to establish a baseline for its performance. The initial evaluation yielded the following metrics:
|
23 |
|
24 |
Loss: 0.6518
|
25 |
-
|
26 |
Evaluation Runtime: 42.6174 seconds
|
27 |
-
|
28 |
Samples per Second: 58.662
|
29 |
|
30 |
These results indicate the model's performance with the original distilbert-base-uncased training, without any adjustments for the specific task of sentiment analysis on movie reviews.
|
31 |
|
32 |
Post-Fine-Tuning Evaluation:
|
33 |
-
|
34 |
After fine-tuning, the model was re-evaluated on the same dataset to assess improvements from the training adjustments:
|
35 |
|
36 |
Loss: 6.091e-06
|
37 |
-
|
38 |
Evaluation Runtime: 39.3821 seconds
|
39 |
-
|
40 |
Samples per Second: 63.481
|
|
|
41 |
The significant reduction in loss demonstrates a substantial increase in the model's accuracy and its capability to correctly classify sentiment in movie reviews. The improvement in processing speed (samples per second) also suggests enhanced efficiency post-fine-tuning.
|
42 |
|
43 |
Discussion:
|
|
|
18 |
This section outlines the performance of the model on the sentiment analysis task using the IMDb movie reviews dataset, both before and after the fine-tuning process. The results highlight the effectiveness of fine-tuning in enhancing model accuracy and generalization.
|
19 |
|
20 |
Pre-Fine-Tuning Evaluation:
|
|
|
21 |
Before fine-tuning, the model was evaluated on the IMDb dataset to establish a baseline for its performance. The initial evaluation yielded the following metrics:
|
22 |
|
23 |
Loss: 0.6518
|
|
|
24 |
Evaluation Runtime: 42.6174 seconds
|
|
|
25 |
Samples per Second: 58.662
|
26 |
|
27 |
These results indicate the model's performance with the original distilbert-base-uncased training, without any adjustments for the specific task of sentiment analysis on movie reviews.
|
28 |
|
29 |
Post-Fine-Tuning Evaluation:
|
|
|
30 |
After fine-tuning, the model was re-evaluated on the same dataset to assess improvements from the training adjustments:
|
31 |
|
32 |
Loss: 6.091e-06
|
|
|
33 |
Evaluation Runtime: 39.3821 seconds
|
|
|
34 |
Samples per Second: 63.481
|
35 |
+
|
36 |
The significant reduction in loss demonstrates a substantial increase in the model's accuracy and its capability to correctly classify sentiment in movie reviews. The improvement in processing speed (samples per second) also suggests enhanced efficiency post-fine-tuning.
|
37 |
|
38 |
Discussion:
|