-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11
Hyperscalers OCR Evaluation #46
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
Signed-off-by: samiuc <sami.ullah.chat@gmail.com>
|
@samiuc Thanks for this update. I recognize some of the comments on the previous PR are now addressed, without checking deeply. To make sure this will integrate cleanly, I set the base branch to |
Signed-off-by: samiuc <sami.ullah.chat@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@samiuc I went through the changes, and have a few remarks below.
The main point I see needs to be addressed is that there must not be a dataset-specific PredictionProvider for pixparse. The API design decouples prediction providers and dataset builders, they must both work independently from one another. Can you please decompose the code for that?
Additionally, I would like you to check what is the overlap of your implementation for Azure DI with the work of @praveenmidde on this PR, which also implements a PredictionProvider for Azure within the table dataset evaluation. Eventually, we should have only one prediction provider for Azure DI.
Signed-off-by: samiuc <sami.ullah.chat@gmail.com>
|
@samiuc I decomposed this PR into three new ones with updates. Let's please continue the work there, then close this PR. |
|
Closing this since it is superseded by the newer PRs. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.