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

Gemma: New Open Models

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 543 posts

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#41

Post by benpacker »

sbarre wrote: post #35
ErneX wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes to llama.cpp https://twitter.com/ggerganov/status/1760293079313973408

I came here wondering if these models are "open" in the sense that they'll show up on sites like Ollama where you can download and run them locally. Am I correct to conclude that this means they eventually will? It's unclear to me from Google's docs exactly what "open" means for Gemma

Yes - they are open weights and open inference code, which means they can be integrated into Ollama.

They are not “open training” (either in the training code or training data sense), so they are not reproducible, which some have suggested ought to be a component of the definition of open models.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#42

Post by kathleenfromgdm »

neximo64 wrote: post #7
alekandreev wrote: post #3

Hello on behalf of the Gemma team! We are really excited to answer any questions you may have about our models. Opinions are our own and not of Google DeepMind.

How are these performing so well compared to Llama 2, are there any documents on the architecture and differences, is it MoE? Also note some of the links on the blog post don't work, e.g debugging tool.

We've documented the architecture (including key differences) in our technical report here (https://goo.gle/GemmaReport), and you can see the architecture implementation in our Git Repo (https://github.com/google-deepmind/gemma).

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#43

Post by kathleenfromgdm »

nalzok wrote: post #28

Congratulations on the release! How can we download the model and run inference locally?

Thank you! You can get started downloading the model and running inference on Kaggle: https://www.kaggle.com/models/google/gemma ; for a full list of ways to interact with the model, you can check out https://ai.google.dev/gemma.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#44

Post by gaogao »

Havoc wrote: post #4

Taking a page out of metas book with open models. I wonder what the game plan here is. Nice that it allows commercial use!

Mostly to boost research and commercial usage around JAX/Gemini is my read.

Any internal research using Gemma is now more easily externally reproducible, external research and frameworks are easier to translate over, goodwill especially from researchers.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#45

Post by tosh »

Benchmarks for Gemma 7B seem to be in the ballpark of Mistral 7B

  +-------------+----------+-------------+-------------+
  | Benchmark   | Gemma 7B | Mistral 7B  | Llama-2 7B  |
  +-------------+----------+-------------+-------------+
  | MMLU        |   64.3   |     60.1    |     45.3    |
  | HellaSwag   |   81.2   |     81.3    |     77.2    |
  | HumanEval   |   32.3   |     30.5    |     12.8    |
  +-------------+----------+-------------+-------------+
via https://mistral.ai/news/announcing-mistral-7b/

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#46

Post by artninja1988 »

silentsanctuary wrote: post #30
artninja1988 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the snyde remarks around open source in the paper and announcement rather off putting. As the ecosystem evolves, we urge the corporate AI community to move beyond demanding to be taken seriously as a player in open source for models that are not actually open, and avoid preaching with a PR statement that can be interpreted as uniformed at best or malicious at worst.

Which remarks are you referring to?

The synde remarks at metas llama license that doesn't allow companies with 700 million monthly active users to use it, while this model also doesn't have a really 'open' license itself and also this paragraph:

>As the ecosystem evolves, we urge the wider AI community to move beyond simplistic ’open vs. closed’ debates, and avoid either exaggerating or minimising potential harms, as we believe a nuanced, collaborative approach to risks and benefits is essential. At Google DeepMind we’re committed to developing high-quality evaluations and invite the community to join us in this effort for a deeper understanding of AI systems.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#47

Post by kathleenfromgdm »

sbarre wrote: post #39
alekandreev wrote: post #3

Hello on behalf of the Gemma team! We are really excited to answer any questions you may have about our models. Opinions are our own and not of Google DeepMind.

Can the Gemma models be downloaded to run locally, like open-source models Llama2, Mistral, etc ? Or is your definition of "open" different?

Yes, you can get started downloading the model and running inference on Kaggle: https://www.kaggle.com/models/google/gemma ; for a full list of ways to interact with the model, you can check out https://ai.google.dev/gemma.

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#48

Post by Kostic »

sbarre wrote: post #39
alekandreev wrote: post #3

Hello on behalf of the Gemma team! We are really excited to answer any questions you may have about our models. Opinions are our own and not of Google DeepMind.

Can the Gemma models be downloaded to run locally, like open-source models Llama2, Mistral, etc ? Or is your definition of "open" different?

It should be possible to run it via llama.cpp[0] now.

[0] https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp/pull/5631

Re: Gemma: New Open Models

#49

Post by SushiHippie »

sbarre wrote: post #35
ErneX wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes to llama.cpp https://twitter.com/ggerganov/status/1760293079313973408

I came here wondering if these models are "open" in the sense that they'll show up on sites like Ollama where you can download and run them locally. Am I correct to conclude that this means they eventually will? It's unclear to me from Google's docs exactly what "open" means for Gemma

https://huggingface.co/google/gemma-7b-it/tree/main

yes, similar to the llama models, you'll also need to accept the license to download them officially. But the llama models have been unofficially downloadable without accepting the license for quite a while, so it's probably just a matter of time.

Post reply on HN