-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 899
[bugfix] fix reward_model #6060
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
Summary of ChangesHello @Jintao-Huang, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request addresses a bug by refining the handling of the Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
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.
Code Review
This pull request correctly adjusts the default problem_type
for reward models to 'regression'. The changes involve updating the default value in argument classes to None
and adding logic to infer the correct problem_type
during model initialization. The documentation has also been updated accordingly. The logic is sound and fixes the intended issue. I've added one minor suggestion to improve code clarity.
swift/llm/model/register.py
Outdated
if problem_type is None: | ||
if model_info.num_labels == 1 or model_meta.is_reward: | ||
problem_type = 'regression' | ||
else: | ||
problem_type = 'single_label_classification' | ||
model_info.config.problem_type = problem_type |
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.
For better readability and to make the logic more direct, you could refactor this block to avoid reassigning the problem_type
variable and instead directly assign to model_info.config.problem_type
within the conditional branches. This makes the flow of control clearer.
if problem_type is None: | |
if model_info.num_labels == 1 or model_meta.is_reward: | |
problem_type = 'regression' | |
else: | |
problem_type = 'single_label_classification' | |
model_info.config.problem_type = problem_type | |
if problem_type is None: | |
if model_info.num_labels == 1 or model_meta.is_reward: | |
model_info.config.problem_type = 'regression' | |
else: | |
model_info.config.problem_type = 'single_label_classification' | |
else: | |
model_info.config.problem_type = problem_type |
No description provided.