Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 244 posts

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#111

Post by CSMastermind »

Havoc wrote: post #104
htrp wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This one seems to be a deal-breaker, if you already know what types of language you want, why would you want openai moderating your parameter tuning set.

Why do you care at all, let alone "dealbreaker". You need a model specifically fine tuned towards something dangerous?

We've already seen problems from that system where they try to enforce copyright (prevent the model from generating copyrighted materials).

I've also encountered the content moderation system when summarizing a book on Islam and I still don't know what triggered it, I certainly wasn't asking it anything offensive. The message was able to regenerate with no problem.

I think generally people are opposed to content restrictions outside of their control being placed on the system they're paying for.

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#112

Post by jron »

Tostino wrote: post #79
eldenring wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPT-3.5 is much, much smarter than Llama2. Its not nearly as close as the benchmarks make it seem.

So, as somebody who has fine tuned llama2 (13b) on both a new prompt template / chat format, as well as instruction following, summarization, knowledge graph creation, traversing a knowledge graph for information, describing relationships in the knowledge graph, etc. It is able to use the knowledge graph to write coherent text that is well structured, lengthy, and follows the connections outlined in the graph to the…

Did you opt for LORA or did you tune all of the layers?

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#113

Post by qeternity »

drcode wrote: post #108
swyx wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it probably isn't adjusting all the weights of the network, only a tiny subfragment of the network source please? this actually isnt all that clear to me

It was what I read on forums when I learned about the process. It's possible that I am mistaken.

It’s almost certainly just a LoRA

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#114

Post by bennyschmidt »

GPT 3.5 is so bad it's useless to me - for writing it's too repetitive of the same kind of jargon, for coding it's wrong way too often. The NLP is also worse, I have to be more explicit. It's just an average chat bot IMO.

GPT 4 @ $20/mo. is significantly better at everything, I use it for doing stuff in Angular lol - when you have an AI explaining the why behind everything, this over-engineered mess of a framework starts to actually make sense. Definitely nice to have around as a translator/teacher or troubleshooting assistant. Can't imagine googling for answers to problems if this gets any better. The main thing is just habit - GPT 4 is lower effort to arrive at more direct, bespoke answers.

The one feature I want is built-in prompt-splitting, so we don't have to use third-party tools. In my all-wise random person's opinion: Forget the old versions of GPT, and forget the phony ethics, and focus on the best version of this technology, sell it for $20/month, make billions and disrupt a lot of things online.

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#115

Post by menzoic »

bennyschmidt wrote: post #114

GPT 3.5 is so bad it's useless to me - for writing it's too repetitive of the same kind of jargon, for coding it's wrong way too often. The NLP is also worse, I have to be more explicit. It's just an average chat bot IMO. GPT 4 @ $20/mo. is significantly better at everything, I use it for doing stuff in Angular lol - when you have an AI explaining the why behind everything, this over-engineered mess of a framework st…

Use code interpreter to upload your files and prompt it to ask you a serires of questions to know what to do next

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#116

Post by lsaferite »

ethbr1 wrote: post #109
lsaferite wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is interesting because I had a similar interaction with llama-13b-chat the other day. I was using some testing code that asked for a mayonnaise recipe (not my question, was just testing using replicate) and it proceeded to talk down to me about the fact that mayonnaise wasn't healthy and how I should use alternatives. User: what is the recipe of mayonnaise? Assistant: Hello! I'd be happy to help you with the rec…

I guess the system prompt begins with "Pretend you are a lawyer. Minimize legal liability to OpenAI in your response..."

Funny. The default system prompt on replicate for the model was:

    You are a helpful, respectful and honest assistant. Always answer as helpfully as possible, while being safe. Your answers should not include any harmful, unethical, racist, sexist, toxic, dangerous, or illegal content. Please ensure that your responses are socially unbiased and positive in nature.

    If a question does not make any sense, or is not factually coherent, explain why instead of answering something not correct. If you don't know the answer to a question, please don't share false information.

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#118

Post by [deleted] »

swyx wrote: post #103
drcode wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not an expert on this subject, but I have done a bit of gpt3 finetuning through their api: I think it's clear that "fine tuning" with GPT is different from fine tuning something like Llama2, in that it probably isn't adjusting all the weights of the network, only a tiny subfragment of the network- Exactly how OpenAI accomplishes this is properietary. The tradeoff is that OpenAI fine tuning is less expensive, but…

> it probably isn't adjusting all the weights of the network, only a tiny subfragment of the network source please? this actually isnt all that clear to me

[deleted]

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#119

Post by sheepscreek »

bennyschmidt wrote: post #114

GPT 3.5 is so bad it's useless to me - for writing it's too repetitive of the same kind of jargon, for coding it's wrong way too often. The NLP is also worse, I have to be more explicit. It's just an average chat bot IMO. GPT 4 @ $20/mo. is significantly better at everything, I use it for doing stuff in Angular lol - when you have an AI explaining the why behind everything, this over-engineered mess of a framework st…

> forget the phony ethics, and focus on the best version of this technology

I’ve experimented a lot between the censored and uncensored versions of Llama 2.

Based on this, I’ve concluded that fine-tuning for political correctness and ethics negatively affects all answers. They become repetitive and washed out.

Re: GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates

#120

Post by jondwillis »

msp26 wrote: post #93
minimaxir wrote: post #4

Generating from a finetuned GPT 3.5 Turbo is 8x the cost of generating from the base model, so you really have to be in the “reduce prompt size by 90%” bucket they mention to get cost effectiveness out of it.

8x is a big gap. I feel that it might be better to just use few-shot prompting and supply some examples (not applicable to every use case ofc) every prompt to steer the output. But it's worth experimenting with at least. Edit: no function calling (until later this fall) too. That's most of my usage right now so I'll pass. Curious on what the verdict on the OAI finetunes are. I remember reading this thread which indic…

That’ll add latency.
Post reply on HN