|
2024-07-25 21:41:45 |
|
*Starting idea: 20240725_214144_rl_lr_adaptation* |
|
2024-07-25 21:41:45 |
|
*Starting Experiments* |
|
Experiment Plan |
|
|
|
We will conduct the following experiments to evaluate the effectiveness of using |
|
Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation in transformer training: |
|
|
|
1 Run 1: Q-learning with initial learning rate 1e-3 |
|
• Dataset: shakespeare_char |
|
• Initial learning rate: 1e-3 |
|
• Q-learning parameters: |
|
• Learning rate for Q-learning: 0.1 |
|
• Discount factor: 0.9 |
|
• Exploration rate: 0.1 |
|
2 Run 2: Q-learning with initial learning rate 5e-4 |
|
• Dataset: enwik8 |
|
• Initial learning rate: 5e-4 |
|
• Q-learning parameters: |
|
• Learning rate for Q-learning: 0.1 |
|
• Discount factor: 0.9 |
|
• Exploration rate: 0.1 |
|
3 Run 3: Q-learning with initial learning rate 1e-3 |
|
• Dataset: text8 |
|
• Initial learning rate: 1e-3 |
|
• Q-learning parameters: |
|
• Learning rate for Q-learning: 0.1 |
|
• Discount factor: 0.9 |
|
• Exploration rate: 0.1 |
|
4 Run 4: Q-learning with initial learning rate 5e-4 |
|
• Dataset: shakespeare_char |
|
• Initial learning rate: 5e-4 |
|
• Q-learning parameters: |
|
• Learning rate for Q-learning: 0.1 |
|
• Discount factor: 0.9 |
|
• Exploration rate: 0.1 |
|
5 Run 5: Q-learning with initial learning rate 1e-3 |
|
• Dataset: enwik8 |
|
• Initial learning rate: 1e-3 |
|
• Q-learning parameters: |
|
• Learning rate for Q-learning: 0.1 |
|
• Discount factor: 0.9 |
|
• Exploration rate: 0.1 |
|
|
|
Implementation Steps |
|
|
|
1 Implement Q-learning agent: Create a Q-learning agent that will adjust the |
|
learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning |
|
rate). |
|
2 Integrate Q-learning agent into training loop: Modify the training loop to |
|
incorporate the Q-learning agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each |
|
evaluation interval. |
|
3 Run experiments: Execute the planned experiments and compare the results with |
|
the baseline. |
|
|
|
Step 1: Implement Q-learning Agent |
|
|
|
Let's start by implementing the Q-learning agent. |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
======= |
|
import numpy as np |
|
|
|
class QLearningAgent: |
|
def __init__(self, lr=0.1, gamma=0.9, epsilon=0.1): |
|
self.lr = lr |
|
self.gamma = gamma |
|
self.epsilon = epsilon |
|
self.q_table = {} |
|
|
|
def get_state(self, val_loss, current_lr): |
|
return (round(val_loss, 2), round(current_lr, 5)) |
|
|
|
def choose_action(self, state): |
|
if np.random.rand() < self.epsilon: |
|
return np.random.choice([-1, 0, 1]) |
|
if state not in self.q_table: |
|
self.q_table[state] = [0, 0, 0] |
|
return np.argmax(self.q_table[state]) - 1 |
|
|
|
def update_q_values(self, state, action, reward, next_state): |
|
if state not in self.q_table: |
|
self.q_table[state] = [0, 0, 0] |
|
if next_state not in self.q_table: |
|
self.q_table[next_state] = [0, 0, 0] |
|
best_next_action = np.argmax(self.q_table[next_state]) |
|
td_target = reward + self.gamma * |
|
self.q_table[next_state][best_next_action] |
|
td_error = td_target - self.q_table[state][action + 1] |
|
self.q_table[state][action + 1] += self.lr * td_error |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Step 2: Integrate Q-learning Agent into Training Loop |
|
|
|
Next, we will modify the training loop in experiment.py to incorporate the |
|
Q-learning agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation interval. |
|
|
|
experiment.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
import numpy as np |
|
import torch |
|
import torch.nn as nn |
|
from torch.nn import functional as F |
|
import argparse |
|
======= |
|
from q_learning_agent import QLearningAgent |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
experiment.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
# model init |
|
======= |
|
# Q-learning agent init |
|
q_agent = QLearningAgent(lr=0.1, gamma=0.9, epsilon=0.1) |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
experiment.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
val_log_info.append( |
|
======= |
|
# Q-learning: Update learning rate based on Q-learning agent |
|
state = q_agent.get_state(losses["val"], lr) |
|
action = q_agent.choose_action(state) |
|
lr = max(min_lr, lr * (1 + action * 0.1)) # Adjust learning rate |
|
next_state = q_agent.get_state(losses["val"], lr) |
|
reward = -losses["val"] # Reward is negative validation loss |
|
q_agent.update_q_values(state, action, reward, next_state) |
|
|
|
val_log_info.append( |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Step 3: Run Experiments |
|
|
|
After implementing the Q-learning agent and integrating it into the training |
|
loop, we will run the experiments using the command python experiment.py |
|
--out_dir=run_i where i is the run number. |
|
|
|
Please proceed to run the first experiment using the command: |
|
|
|
|
|
python experiment.py --out_dir=run_1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Once the first experiment is complete, we can proceed with the subsequent |
|
experiments. |
|
10207 prompt tokens, 1220 completion tokens, $0.069335 cost |
|
|
|
Applied edit to q_learning_agent.py |
|
Applied edit to experiment.py |
|
|
|
# Fix any errors below, if possible. |
|
|
|
## Running: /home/anon/ai_scientist/venv/bin/python3 -m flake8 |
|
--select=E9,F821,F823,F831,F406,F407,F701,F702,F704,F706 --show-source |
|
--isolated experiment.py |
|
|
|
experiment.py:12:17: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
class LayerNorm(nn.Module): |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:17:23: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.weight = nn.Parameter(torch.ones(ndim)) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:17:36: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
self.weight = nn.Parameter(torch.ones(ndim)) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:18:21: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.bias = nn.Parameter(torch.zeros(ndim)) if bias else None |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:18:34: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
self.bias = nn.Parameter(torch.zeros(ndim)) if bias else None |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:21:16: F821 undefined name 'F' |
|
return F.layer_norm(input, self.weight.shape, self.weight, self.bias, |
|
1e-5) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:24:27: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
class CausalSelfAttention(nn.Module): |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:30:23: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.c_attn = nn.Linear(config.n_embd, 3 * config.n_embd, |
|
bias=config.bias) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:32:23: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.c_proj = nn.Linear(config.n_embd, config.n_embd, bias=config.bias) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:34:29: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.attn_dropout = nn.Dropout(config.dropout) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:35:30: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.resid_dropout = nn.Dropout(config.dropout) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:40:30: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
self.flash = hasattr(torch.nn.functional, |
|
"scaled_dot_product_attention") |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:48:17: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
torch.tril(torch.ones(config.block_size, |
|
config.block_size)).view( |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:48:28: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
torch.tril(torch.ones(config.block_size, |
|
config.block_size)).view( |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:73:17: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
y = torch.nn.functional.scaled_dot_product_attention( |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:85:19: F821 undefined name 'F' |
|
att = F.softmax(att, dim=-1) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:97:11: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
class MLP(nn.Module): |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:101:21: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.c_fc = nn.Linear(config.n_embd, 4 * config.n_embd, |
|
bias=config.bias) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:102:21: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.gelu = nn.GELU() |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:103:23: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.c_proj = nn.Linear(4 * config.n_embd, config.n_embd, |
|
bias=config.bias) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:104:24: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.dropout = nn.Dropout(config.dropout) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:114:13: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
class Block(nn.Module): |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:144:11: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
class GPT(nn.Module): |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:152:28: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.transformer = nn.ModuleDict( |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:154:21: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
wte=nn.Embedding(config.vocab_size, config.n_embd), |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:155:21: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
wpe=nn.Embedding(config.block_size, config.n_embd), |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:156:22: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
drop=nn.Dropout(config.dropout), |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:157:19: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
h=nn.ModuleList([Block(config) for _ in range(config.n_layer)]), |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:161:24: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.lm_head = nn.Linear(config.n_embd, config.vocab_size, bias=False) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:175:17: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
torch.nn.init.normal_( |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:195:31: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
if isinstance(module, nn.Linear): |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:196:13: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
torch.nn.init.normal_(module.weight, mean=0.0, std=0.02) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:198:17: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
torch.nn.init.zeros_(module.bias) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:199:33: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
elif isinstance(module, nn.Embedding): |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:200:13: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
torch.nn.init.normal_(module.weight, mean=0.0, std=0.02) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:208:15: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
pos = torch.arange(0, t, dtype=torch.long, device=device) # shape (t) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:208:40: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
pos = torch.arange(0, t, dtype=torch.long, device=device) # shape (t) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:221:20: F821 undefined name 'F' |
|
loss = F.cross_entropy( |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:239:39: F821 undefined name 'nn' |
|
self.transformer.wpe.weight = nn.Parameter( |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:268:56: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
fused_available = "fused" in |
|
inspect.signature(torch.optim.AdamW).parameters |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:271:21: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
optimizer = torch.optim.AdamW( |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:278:6: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
@torch.no_grad() |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:298:24: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
v, _ = torch.topk(logits, min(top_k, logits.size(-1))) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:301:21: F821 undefined name 'F' |
|
probs = F.softmax(logits, dim=-1) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:303:24: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
idx_next = torch.multinomial(probs, num_samples=1) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:305:19: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
idx = torch.cat((idx, idx_next), dim=1) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:351:27: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
dtype = 'bfloat16' if torch.cuda.is_available() and |
|
torch.cuda.is_bf16_supported() else 'float16' # 'float32', 'bfloat16', or |
|
'float16', the latter will auto implement a GradScaler |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:351:57: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
dtype = 'bfloat16' if torch.cuda.is_available() and |
|
torch.cuda.is_bf16_supported() else 'float16' # 'float32', 'bfloat16', or |
|
'float16', the latter will auto implement a GradScaler |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:363:5: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
torch.manual_seed(1337 + seed_offset) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:364:5: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
torch.backends.cuda.matmul.allow_tf32 = True # allow tf32 on matmul |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:365:5: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
torch.backends.cudnn.allow_tf32 = True # allow tf32 on cudnn |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:369:20: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
"float32": torch.float32, |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:370:21: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
"bfloat16": torch.bfloat16, |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:371:20: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
"float16": torch.float16, |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:376:14: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
else torch.amp.autocast(device_type=device_type, dtype=ptdtype) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:387:20: F821 undefined name 'np' |
|
data = np.memmap(os.path.join(data_dir, "train.bin"), |
|
dtype=np.uint16, mode="r") |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:387:73: F821 undefined name 'np' |
|
data = np.memmap(os.path.join(data_dir, "train.bin"), |
|
dtype=np.uint16, mode="r") |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:389:20: F821 undefined name 'np' |
|
data = np.memmap(os.path.join(data_dir, "val.bin"), dtype=np.uint16, |
|
mode="r") |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:389:71: F821 undefined name 'np' |
|
data = np.memmap(os.path.join(data_dir, "val.bin"), dtype=np.uint16, |
|
mode="r") |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:390:14: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
ix = torch.randint(len(data) - block_size, (batch_size,)) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:391:13: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
x = torch.stack( |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:392:14: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
[torch.from_numpy((data[i : i + block_size]).astype(np.int64)) for i |
|
in ix] |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:392:65: F821 undefined name 'np' |
|
[torch.from_numpy((data[i : i + block_size]).astype(np.int64)) for i |
|
in ix] |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:394:13: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
y = torch.stack( |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:396:17: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
torch.from_numpy((data[i + 1 : i + 1 + |
|
block_size]).astype(np.int64)) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:396:76: F821 undefined name 'np' |
|
torch.from_numpy((data[i + 1 : i + 1 + |
|
block_size]).astype(np.int64)) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:451:14: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
scaler = torch.cuda.amp.GradScaler(enabled=(dtype == "float16")) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:463:17: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
model = torch.compile(model) # requires PyTorch 2.0 |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:467:6: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
@torch.no_grad() |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:472:22: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
losses = torch.zeros(eval_iters) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:548:21: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
torch.save(checkpoint, os.path.join(out_dir, "ckpt.pt")) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:567:13: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
torch.nn.utils.clip_grad_norm_(model.parameters(), grad_clip) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:632:10: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
x = (torch.tensor(start_ids, dtype=torch.long, device=device)[None, ...]) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:632:40: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
x = (torch.tensor(start_ids, dtype=torch.long, device=device)[None, ...]) |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:637:10: F821 undefined name 'torch' |
|
with torch.no_grad(): |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:671:10: F821 undefined name 'argparse' |
|
parser = argparse.ArgumentParser(description='Run experiment') |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:694:31: F821 undefined name 'np' |
|
means = {f"{k}_mean": np.mean(v) for k, v in final_info_dict.items()} |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:695:35: F821 undefined name 'np' |
|
stderrs = {f"{k}_stderr": np.std(v) / len(v) for k, v in |
|
final_info_dict.items()} |
|
^ |
|
experiment.py:706:9: F821 undefined name 'np' |
|
np.save(f, all_results) |
|
^ |
|
|
|
## See relevant lines below marked with █. |
|
|
|
experiment.py: |
|
...⋮... |
|
9│from q_learning_agent import QLearningAgent |
|
10│ |
|
11│# --- BEGIN model.py --- |
|
12█class LayerNorm(nn.Module): |
|
13│ """LayerNorm but with an optional bias. PyTorch doesn't support simply |
|
bias=False""" |
|
14│ |
|
15│ def __init__(self, ndim, bias): |
|
16│ super().__init__() |
|
17█ self.weight = nn.Parameter(torch.ones(ndim)) |
|
18█ self.bias = nn.Parameter(torch.zeros(ndim)) if bias else None |
|
19│ |
|
20│ def forward(self, input): |
|
21█ return F.layer_norm(input, self.weight.shape, self.weight, |
|
self.bias, 1e-5) |
|
22│ |
|
23│ |
|
24█class CausalSelfAttention(nn.Module): |
|
25│ |
|
26│ def __init__(self, config): |
|
27│ super().__init__() |
|
28│ assert config.n_embd % config.n_head == 0 |
|
29│ # key, query, value projections for all heads, but in a batch |
|
30█ self.c_attn = nn.Linear(config.n_embd, 3 * config.n_embd, |
|
bias=config.bias) |
|
31│ # output projection |
|
32█ self.c_proj = nn.Linear(config.n_embd, config.n_embd, |
|
bias=config.bias) |
|
33│ # regularization |
|
34█ self.attn_dropout = nn.Dropout(config.dropout) |
|
35█ self.resid_dropout = nn.Dropout(config.dropout) |
|
36│ self.n_head = config.n_head |
|
37│ self.n_embd = config.n_embd |
|
38│ self.dropout = config.dropout |
|
39│ # flash attention make GPU go brrrrr but support is only in PyTorch |
|
>= 2.0 |
|
40█ self.flash = hasattr(torch.nn.functional, |
|
"scaled_dot_product_attention") |
|
41│ if not self.flash: |
|
42│ print( |
|
43│ "WARNING: using slow attention. Flash Attention requires |
|
PyTorch >= 2.0" |
|
44│ ) |
|
45│ # causal mask to ensure that attention is only applied to the |
|
left in the input sequence |
|
46│ self.register_buffer( |
|
47│ "bias", |
|
48█ torch.tril(torch.ones(config.block_size, |
|
config.block_size)).view( |
|
49│ 1, 1, config.block_size, config.block_size |
|
50│ ), |
|
51│ ) |
|
52│ |
|
53│ def forward(self, x): |
|
54│ B, T, C = ( |
|
55│ x.size() |
|
...⋮... |
|
70│ # causal self-attention; Self-attend: (B, nh, T, hs) x (B, nh, hs, |
|
T) -> (B, nh, T, T) |
|
71│ if self.flash: |
|
72│ # efficient attention using Flash Attention CUDA kernels |
|
73█ y = torch.nn.functional.scaled_dot_product_attention( |
|
74│ q, |
|
75│ k, |
|
76│ v, |
|
77│ attn_mask=None, |
|
78│ dropout_p=self.dropout if self.training else 0, |
|
79│ is_causal=True, |
|
80│ ) |
|
81│ else: |
|
82│ # manual implementation of attention |
|
83│ att = (q @ k.transpose(-2, -1)) * (1.0 / math.sqrt(k.size(-1))) |
|
84│ att = att.masked_fill(self.bias[:, :, :T, :T] == 0, |
|
float("-inf")) |
|
85█ att = F.softmax(att, dim=-1) |
|
86│ att = self.attn_dropout(att) |
|
87│ y = att @ v # (B, nh, T, T) x (B, nh, T, hs) -> (B, nh, T, hs) |
|
88│ y = ( |
|
...⋮... |
|
94│ return y |
|
95│ |
|
96│ |
|
97█class MLP(nn.Module): |
|
98│ |
|
99│ def __init__(self, config): |
|
100│ super().__init__() |
|
101█ self.c_fc = nn.Linear(config.n_embd, 4 * config.n_embd, |
|
bias=config.bias) |
|
102█ self.gelu = nn.GELU() |
|
103█ self.c_proj = nn.Linear(4 * config.n_embd, config.n_embd, |
|
bias=config.bias) |
|
104█ self.dropout = nn.Dropout(config.dropout) |
|
105│ |
|
106│ def forward(self, x): |
|
107│ x = self.c_fc(x) |
|
...⋮... |
|
111│ return x |
|
112│ |
|
113│ |
|
114█class Block(nn.Module): |
|
115│ |
|
116│ def __init__(self, config): |
|
117│ super().__init__() |
|
...⋮... |
|
141│ ) |
|
142│ |
|
143│ |
|
144█class GPT(nn.Module): |
|
145│ |
|
146│ def __init__(self, config): |
|
147│ super().__init__() |
|
148│ assert config.vocab_size is not None |
|
149│ assert config.block_size is not None |
|
150│ self.config = config |
|
151│ |
|
152█ self.transformer = nn.ModuleDict( |
|
153│ dict( |
|
154█ wte=nn.Embedding(config.vocab_size, config.n_embd), |
|
155█ wpe=nn.Embedding(config.block_size, config.n_embd), |
|
156█ drop=nn.Dropout(config.dropout), |
|
157█ h=nn.ModuleList([Block(config) for _ in |
|
range(config.n_layer)]), |
|
158│ ln_f=LayerNorm(config.n_embd, bias=config.bias), |
|
159│ ) |
|
160│ ) |
|
161█ self.lm_head = nn.Linear(config.n_embd, config.vocab_size, |
|
bias=False) |
|
162│ # with weight tying when using torch.compile() some warnings get |
|
generated: |
|
163│ # "UserWarning: functional_call was passed multiple values for tied |
|
weights. |
|
164│ # This behavior is deprecated and will be an error in future |
|
versions" |
|
...⋮... |
|
172│ # apply special scaled init to the residual projections, per GPT-2 |
|
paper |
|
173│ for pn, p in self.named_parameters(): |
|
174│ if pn.endswith("c_proj.weight"): |
|
175█ torch.nn.init.normal_( |
|
176│ p, mean=0.0, std=0.02 / math.sqrt(2 * config.n_layer) |
|
177│ ) |
|
178│ |
|
...⋮... |
|
192│ return n_params |
|
193│ |
|
194│ def _init_weights(self, module): |
|
195█ if isinstance(module, nn.Linear): |
|
196█ torch.nn.init.normal_(module.weight, mean=0.0, std=0.02) |
|
197│ if module.bias is not None: |
|
198█ torch.nn.init.zeros_(module.bias) |
|
199█ elif isinstance(module, nn.Embedding): |
|
200█ torch.nn.init.normal_(module.weight, mean=0.0, std=0.02) |
|
201│ |
|
202│ def forward(self, idx, targets=None): |
|
203│ device = idx.device |
|
204│ b, t = idx.size() |
|
205│ assert ( |
|
206│ t <= self.config.block_size |
|
207│ ), f"Cannot forward sequence of length {t}, block size is only |
|
{self.config.block_size}" |
|
208█ pos = torch.arange(0, t, dtype=torch.long, device=device) # shape |
|
(t) |
|
209│ |
|
210│ # forward the GPT model itself |
|
211│ tok_emb = self.transformer.wte(idx) # token embeddings of shape (b, |
|
t, n_embd) |
|
...⋮... |
|
218│ if targets is not None: |
|
219│ # if we are given some desired targets also calculate the loss |
|
220│ logits = self.lm_head(x) |
|
221█ loss = F.cross_entropy( |
|
222│ logits.view(-1, logits.size(-1)), targets.view(-1), |
|
ignore_index=-1 |
|
223│ ) |
|
224│ else: |
|
...⋮... |
|
233│ def crop_block_size(self, block_size): |
|
...⋮... |
|
236│ # but want to use a smaller block size for some smaller, simpler |
|
model |
|
237│ assert block_size <= self.config.block_size |
|
238│ self.config.block_size = block_size |
|
239█ self.transformer.wpe.weight = nn.Parameter( |
|
240│ self.transformer.wpe.weight[:block_size] |
|
241│ ) |
|
242│ for block in self.transformer.h: |
|
...⋮... |
|
246│ def configure_optimizers(self, weight_decay, learning_rate, betas, |
|
device_type): |
|
247│ # start with all of the candidate parameters |
|
248│ param_dict = {pn: p for pn, p in self.named_parameters()} |
|
...⋮... |
|
265│ f"num non-decayed parameter tensors: {len(nodecay_params)}, with |
|
{num_nodecay_params:,} parameters" |
|
266│ ) |
|
267│ # Create AdamW optimizer and use the fused version if it is |
|
available |
|
268█ fused_available = "fused" in |
|
inspect.signature(torch.optim.AdamW).parameters |
|
269│ use_fused = fused_available and device_type == "cuda" |
|
270│ extra_args = dict(fused=True) if use_fused else dict() |
|
271█ optimizer = torch.optim.AdamW( |
|
272│ optim_groups, lr=learning_rate, betas=betas, **extra_args |
|
273│ ) |
|
274│ print(f"using fused AdamW: {use_fused}") |
|
275│ |
|
276│ return optimizer |
|
277│ |
|
278█ @torch.no_grad() |
|
279│ def generate(self, idx, max_new_tokens, temperature=1.0, top_k=None): |
|
280│ """ |
|
281│ Take a conditioning sequence of indices idx (LongTensor of shape |
|
(b,t)) and complete |
|
282│ the sequence max_new_tokens times, feeding the predictions back into |
|
the model each time. |
|
283│ Most likely you'll want to make sure to be in model.eval() mode of |
|
operation for this. |
|
284│ """ |
|
285│ for _ in range(max_new_tokens): |
|
286│ # if the sequence context is growing too long we must crop it at |
|
block_size |
|
287│ idx_cond = ( |
|
288│ idx |
|
289│ if idx.size(1) <= self.config.block_size |
|
290│ else idx[:, -self.config.block_size :] |
|
...⋮... |
|
295│ logits = logits[:, -1, :] / temperature |
|
296│ # optionally crop the logits to only the top k options |
|
297│ if top_k is not None: |
|
298█ v, _ = torch.topk(logits, min(top_k, logits.size(-1))) |
|
299│ logits[logits < v[:, [-1]]] = -float("Inf") |
|
300│ # apply softmax to convert logits to (normalized) probabilities |
|
301█ probs = F.softmax(logits, dim=-1) |
|
302│ # sample from the distribution |
|
303█ idx_next = torch.multinomial(probs, num_samples=1) |
|
304│ # append sampled index to the running sequence and continue |
|
305█ idx = torch.cat((idx, idx_next), dim=1) |
|
306│ |
|
307│ return idx |
|
308│ |
|
...⋮... |
|
311│def train(dataset="shakespeare_char", out_dir="run_0", seed_offset=0): |
|
...⋮... |
|
315│ gradient_accumulation_steps = 1 |
|
...⋮... |
|
348│ backend = "nccl" # 'nccl', 'gloo', etc. |
|
349│ # system |
|
350│ device = "cuda" # Always use CUDA |
|
351█ dtype = 'bfloat16' if torch.cuda.is_available() and |
|
torch.cuda.is_bf16_supported() else 'float16' # 'float32', 'bfloat16', or |
|
'float16', the latter will auto implement a GradScaler |
|
352│ compile = True # do not torch compile the model on macbooks |
|
353│ |
|
354│ |
|
...⋮... |
|
360│ |
|
361│ if master_process: |
|
362│ os.makedirs(out_dir, exist_ok=True) |
|
363█ torch.manual_seed(1337 + seed_offset) |
|
364█ torch.backends.cuda.matmul.allow_tf32 = True # allow tf32 on matmul |
|
365█ torch.backends.cudnn.allow_tf32 = True # allow tf32 on cudnn |
|
366│ device_type = "cuda" if "cuda" in device else "cpu" # for later use in |
|
torch.autocast |
|
367│ # note: float16 data type will automatically use a GradScaler |
|
368│ ptdtype = { |
|
369█ "float32": torch.float32, |
|
370█ "bfloat16": torch.bfloat16, |
|
371█ "float16": torch.float16, |
|
372│ }[dtype] |
|
373│ ctx = ( |
|
374│ nullcontext() |
|
375│ if device_type == "cpu" |
|
376█ else torch.amp.autocast(device_type=device_type, dtype=ptdtype) |
|
377│ ) |
|
378│ |
|
379│ # poor man's data loader |
|
...⋮... |
|
383│ def get_batch(split): |
|
384│ # We recreate np.memmap every batch to avoid a memory leak, as per |
|
385│ # |
|
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45132940/numpy-memmap-memory-usage-want-to-i |
|
terate-once/61472122#61472122 |
|
386│ if split == "train": |
|
387█ data = np.memmap(os.path.join(data_dir, "train.bin"), |
|
dtype=np.uint16, mode="r") |
|
388│ else: |
|
389█ data = np.memmap(os.path.join(data_dir, "val.bin"), |
|
dtype=np.uint16, mode="r") |
|
390█ ix = torch.randint(len(data) - block_size, (batch_size,)) |
|
391█ x = torch.stack( |
|
392█ [torch.from_numpy((data[i : i + block_size]).astype(np.int64)) |
|
for i in ix] |
|
393│ ) |
|
394█ y = torch.stack( |
|
395│ [ |
|
396█ torch.from_numpy((data[i + 1 : i + 1 + |
|
block_size]).astype(np.int64)) |
|
397│ for i in ix |
|
398│ ] |
|
399│ ) |
|
...⋮... |
|
448│ model.to(device) |
|
449│ |
|
450│ # initialize a GradScaler. If enabled=False scaler is a no-op |
|
451█ scaler = torch.cuda.amp.GradScaler(enabled=(dtype == "float16")) |
|
452│ |
|
453│ # optimizer |
|
454│ optimizer = model.configure_optimizers( |
|
...⋮... |
|
460│ if compile: |
|
461│ print("compiling the model... (takes a ~minute)") |
|
462│ unoptimized_model = model |
|
463█ model = torch.compile(model) # requires PyTorch 2.0 |
|
464│ |
|
465│ |
|
466│ # helps estimate an arbitrarily accurate loss over either split using |
|
many batches |
|
467█ @torch.no_grad() |
|
468│ def estimate_loss(): |
|
469│ out = {} |
|
470│ model.eval() |
|
471│ for split in ["train", "val"]: |
|
472█ losses = torch.zeros(eval_iters) |
|
473│ for k in range(eval_iters): |
|
474│ X, Y = get_batch(split) |
|
475│ with ctx: |
|
...⋮... |
|
508│ while True: |
|
509│ |
|
...⋮... |
|
511│ lr = get_lr(iter_num) if decay_lr else learning_rate |
|
...⋮... |
|
516│ if iter_num % eval_interval == 0 and master_process: |
|
517│ losses = estimate_loss() |
|
...⋮... |
|
537│ if losses["val"] < best_val_loss or always_save_checkpoint: |
|
538│ best_val_loss = losses["val"] |
|
539│ if iter_num > 0 and not never_save_checkpoint: |
|
540│ checkpoint = { |
|
541│ "model": raw_model.state_dict(), |
|
542│ "optimizer": optimizer.state_dict(), |
|
543│ "model_args": model_args, |
|
544│ "iter_num": iter_num, |
|
545│ "best_val_loss": best_val_loss, |
|
546│ } |
|
547│ print(f"saving checkpoint to {out_dir}") |
|
548█ torch.save(checkpoint, os.path.join(out_dir, "ckpt.pt")) |
|
549│ if iter_num == 0 and eval_only: |
|
550│ break |
|
551│ |
|
...⋮... |
|
564│ # clip the gradient |
|
565│ if grad_clip != 0.0: |
|
566│ scaler.unscale_(optimizer) |
|
567█ torch.nn.utils.clip_grad_norm_(model.parameters(), grad_clip) |
|
568│ # step the optimizer and scaler if training in fp16 |
|
569│ scaler.step(optimizer) |
|
570│ scaler.update() |
|
...⋮... |
|
629│ with open(start[5:], 'r', encoding='utf-8') as f: |
|
630│ start = f.read() |
|
631│ start_ids = encode(start) |
|
632█ x = (torch.tensor(start_ids, dtype=torch.long, device=device)[None, |
|
...]) |
|
633│ |
|
634│ # Run generation |
|
635│ model.eval() |
|
636│ results = [] |
|
637█ with torch.no_grad(): |
|
638│ with ctx: |
|
639│ for k in range(num_samples): |
|
640│ start_time = time.time() |
|
...⋮... |
|
668│ json.dump(final_info, f) |
|
669│ return final_info, train_log_info, val_log_info |
|
670│ |
|
671█parser = argparse.ArgumentParser(description='Run experiment') |
|
672│parser.add_argument('--out_dir', type=str, default='run_0', help='Output |
|
directory') |
|
673│args = parser.parse_args() |
|
674│ |
|
675│if __name__ == "__main__": |
|
676│ num_seeds = { |
|
677│ "shakespeare_char": 3, |
|
678│ "enwik8": 1, |
|
679│ "text8": 1, |
|
...⋮... |
|
685│ for dataset in ["shakespeare_char", "enwik8", "text8"]: |
|
686│ final_info_list = [] |
|
...⋮... |
|
691│ all_results[f"{dataset}_{seed_offset}_val_info"] = val_info |
|
692│ final_info_list.append(final_info) |
|
693│ final_info_dict = {k: [d[k] for d in final_info_list] for k in |
|
final_info_list[0].keys()} |
|
694█ means = {f"{k}_mean": np.mean(v) for k, v in |
|
final_info_dict.items()} |
|
695█ stderrs = {f"{k}_stderr": np.std(v) / len(v) for k, v in |
|
final_info_dict.items()} |
|
696│ final_infos[dataset] = { |
|
697│ "means": means, |
|
698│ "stderrs": stderrs, |
|
...⋮... |
|
703│ json.dump(final_infos, f) |
|
704│ |
|
705│ with open(os.path.join(out_dir, "all_results.npy"), "wb") as f: |
|
706█ np.save(f, all_results) |
|
|
|
|
|
To fix the errors, we need to ensure that the necessary imports for torch, |
|
torch.nn, torch.nn.functional, numpy, and argparse are included in |
|
experiment.py. |
|
|
|
Here are the SEARCH/REPLACE blocks to fix the errors: |
|
|
|
experiment.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
import os |
|
import time |
|
import math |
|
import pickle |
|
import inspect |
|
import json |
|
from contextlib import nullcontext |
|
from dataclasses import dataclass |
|
from q_learning_agent import QLearningAgent |
|
======= |
|
import os |
|
import time |
|
import math |
|
import pickle |
|
import inspect |
|
import json |
|
import numpy as np |
|
import torch |
|
import torch.nn as nn |
|
import torch.nn.functional as F |
|
import argparse |
|
from contextlib import nullcontext |
|
from dataclasses import dataclass |
|
from q_learning_agent import QLearningAgent |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Please apply these changes and then re-run the command python experiment.py |
|
--out_dir=run_1. |
|
18550 prompt tokens, 200 completion tokens, $0.095750 cost |
|
|
|
Applied edit to experiment.py |
|
To fix the errors, we need to ensure that the necessary imports for `torch`, `torch.nn`, `torch.nn.functional`, `numpy`, and `argparse` are included in `experiment.py`. |
|
|
|
Here are the *SEARCH/REPLACE* blocks to fix the errors: |
|
|
|
experiment.py |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
import os |
|
import time |
|
import math |
|
import pickle |
|
import inspect |
|
import json |
|
from contextlib import nullcontext |
|
from dataclasses import dataclass |
|
from q_learning_agent import QLearningAgent |
|
======= |
|
import os |
|
import time |
|
import math |
|
import pickle |
|
import inspect |
|
import json |
|
import numpy as np |
|
import torch |
|
import torch.nn as nn |
|
import torch.nn.functional as F |
|
import argparse |
|
from contextlib import nullcontext |
|
from dataclasses import dataclass |
|
from q_learning_agent import QLearningAgent |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
``` |
|
|
|
Please apply these changes and then re-run the command `python experiment.py --out_dir=run_1`. |
|
Traceback (most recent call last): |
|
File "/home/anon/ai_scientist/results/nanoGPT/20240725_214144_rl_lr_adaptation/experiment.py", line 693, in <module> |
|
final_info, train_info, val_info = train(dataset, out_dir, seed_offset) |
|
File "/home/anon/ai_scientist/results/nanoGPT/20240725_214144_rl_lr_adaptation/experiment.py", line 527, in train |
|
state = q_agent.get_state(losses["val"], lr) |
|
File "/home/anon/ai_scientist/results/nanoGPT/20240725_214144_rl_lr_adaptation/q_learning_agent.py", line 11, in get_state |
|
return (round(val_loss, 2), round(current_lr, 5)) |
|
TypeError: type Tensor doesn't define __round__ method |
|
|
|
Run 1 failed with return code 1 |
|
Run failed with the following error Traceback (most recent call last): |
|
File "/home/anon/ai_scientist/results/nanoGPT/20240725_214144_rl_lr_adaptation/experiment.py", line 693, in <module> |
|
final_info, train_info, val_info = train(dataset, out_dir, seed_offset) |
|
File "/home/anon/ai_scientist/results/nanoGPT/20240725_214144_rl_lr_adaptation/experiment.py", line 527, in train |
|
state = q_agent.get_state(losses["val"], lr) |
|
File "/home/anon/ai_scientist/results/nanoGPT/20240725_214144_rl_lr_adaptation/q_learning_agent.py", line 11, in get_state |
|
return (round(val_loss, 2), round(current_lr, 5)) |
|
TypeError: type Tensor doesn't define __round__ method |
|
|
|
To fix the error, we need to convert the val_loss tensor to a Python float |
|
before rounding it. We can do this by calling the .item() method on the tensor. |
|
|
|
Here are the necessary changes: |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
return (round(val_loss, 2), round(current_lr, 5)) |
|
======= |
|
return (round(val_loss.item(), 2), round(current_lr, 5)) |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
This change will ensure that val_loss is converted to a float before rounding, |
|
which should resolve the TypeError. |
|
10543 prompt tokens, 122 completion tokens, $0.054545 cost |
|
|
|
Applied edit to q_learning_agent.py |
|
To fix the error, we need to convert the `val_loss` tensor to a Python float before rounding it. We can do this by calling the `.item()` method on the tensor. |
|
|
|
Here are the necessary changes: |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
return (round(val_loss, 2), round(current_lr, 5)) |
|
======= |
|
return (round(val_loss.item(), 2), round(current_lr, 5)) |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
``` |
|
|
|
This change will ensure that `val_loss` is converted to a float before rounding, which should resolve the `TypeError`. |
|
First, let's update the notes.txt file to include the results and description |
|
for Run 1. |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
## Run 0: Baseline |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8186181902885437, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4654763221740723, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
77.26942734718322, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 666.5076153519527}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.930223822593689, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
1.0055421590805054, 'total_train_time_mean': 819.4551751613617, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 671.9918599180683}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 1.0013301372528076, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.979989230632782, 'total_train_time_mean': 801.224205493927, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 671.5678332249411}} |
|
Description: Baseline results. |
|
======= |
|
## Run 0: Baseline |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8186181902885437, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4654763221740723, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
77.26942734718322, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 666.5076153519527}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.930223822593689, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
1.0055421590805054, 'total_train_time_mean': 819.4551751613617, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 671.9918599180683}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 1.0013301372528076, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.979989230632782, 'total_train_time_mean': 801.224205493927, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 671.5678332249411}} |
|
Description: Baseline results. |
|
|
|
## Run 1: Q-learning with initial learning rate adaptation |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8112714489301046, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4664853016535442, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
76.33582202593486, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 680.220956113138}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9324554204940796, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
1.0050768852233887, 'total_train_time_mean': 799.199625492096, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 690.1664700419294}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9926028251647949, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9795507192611694, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.1075961589813, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 691.9504174462957}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the curre |
|
state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward signal derive |
|
from validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was |
|
modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at eac |
|
evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using |
|
static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets |
|
(shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Next, let's implement the next experiment. For this experiment, we will use a |
|
different initial learning rate to see how it affects the Q-learning adaptation. |
|
We will set the initial learning rate to 2e-3 for shakespeare_char and 1e-3 for |
|
enwik8 and text8. |
|
|
|
experiment.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
learning_rate = ( |
|
1e-3 if dataset == "shakespeare_char" else 5e-4 |
|
) |
|
======= |
|
learning_rate = ( |
|
2e-3 if dataset == "shakespeare_char" else 1e-3 |
|
) |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Now, you can run the next experiment with the command: |
|
|
|
|
|
python experiment.py --out_dir=run_2 |
|
|
|
11043 prompt tokens, 973 completion tokens, $0.069810 cost |
|
|
|
Applied edit to experiment.py |
|
Applied edit to notes.txt |
|
First, let's update the `notes.txt` file to include the results and description for Run 1. |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
## Run 0: Baseline |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8186181902885437, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4654763221740723, 'total_train_time_mean': 77.26942734718322, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 666.5076153519527}, 'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.930223822593689, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.0055421590805054, 'total_train_time_mean': 819.4551751613617, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 671.9918599180683}, 'text8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 1.0013301372528076, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.979989230632782, 'total_train_time_mean': 801.224205493927, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 671.5678332249411}} |
|
Description: Baseline results. |
|
======= |
|
## Run 0: Baseline |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8186181902885437, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4654763221740723, 'total_train_time_mean': 77.26942734718322, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 666.5076153519527}, 'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.930223822593689, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.0055421590805054, 'total_train_time_mean': 819.4551751613617, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 671.9918599180683}, 'text8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 1.0013301372528076, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.979989230632782, 'total_train_time_mean': 801.224205493927, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 671.5678332249411}} |
|
Description: Baseline results. |
|
|
|
## Run 1: Q-learning with initial learning rate adaptation |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8112714489301046, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4664853016535442, 'total_train_time_mean': 76.33582202593486, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 680.220956113138}, 'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9324554204940796, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.0050768852233887, 'total_train_time_mean': 799.199625492096, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 690.1664700419294}, 'text8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9926028251647949, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9795507192611694, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.1075961589813, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 691.9504174462957}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward signal derived from validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
``` |
|
|
|
Next, let's implement the next experiment. For this experiment, we will use a different initial learning rate to see how it affects the Q-learning adaptation. We will set the initial learning rate to `2e-3` for `shakespeare_char` and `1e-3` for `enwik8` and `text8`. |
|
|
|
experiment.py |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
learning_rate = ( |
|
1e-3 if dataset == "shakespeare_char" else 5e-4 |
|
) |
|
======= |
|
learning_rate = ( |
|
2e-3 if dataset == "shakespeare_char" else 1e-3 |
|
) |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
``` |
|
|
|
Now, you can run the next experiment with the command: |
|
```sh |
|
python experiment.py --out_dir=run_2 |
|
``` |
|
First, let's update the notes.txt file to include the results and description |
|
for Run 2. |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
## Run 1: Q-learning with initial learning rate adaptation |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8112714489301046, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4664853016535442, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
76.33582202593486, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 680.220956113138}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9324554204940796, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
1.0050768852233887, 'total_train_time_mean': 799.199625492096, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 690.1664700419294}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9926028251647949, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9795507192611694, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.1075961589813, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 691.9504174462957}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the curre |
|
state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward signal derive |
|
from validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was |
|
modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at eac |
|
evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using |
|
static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets |
|
(shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
======= |
|
## Run 1: Q-learning with initial learning rate adaptation |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8112714489301046, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4664853016535442, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
76.33582202593486, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 680.220956113138}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9324554204940796, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
1.0050768852233887, 'total_train_time_mean': 799.199625492096, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 690.1664700419294}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9926028251647949, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9795507192611694, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.1075961589813, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 691.9504174462957}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the curre |
|
state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward signal derive |
|
from validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was |
|
modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at eac |
|
evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using |
|
static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets |
|
(shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
|
|
## Run 2: Q-learning with different initial learning rates |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8047561645507812, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4602874914805095, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
76.26222737630208, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 675.5019470493302}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9224221706390381, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9933806657791138, 'total_train_time_mean': 806.1875951290131, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 682.6881990162254}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9798105955123901, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9613448977470398, 'total_train_time_mean': 807.7686207294464, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 652.3187905322042}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation with different initial learning rates. The initial learning rate wa |
|
set to 2e-3 for shakespeare_char and 1e-3 for enwik8 and text8. The Q-learning |
|
agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, |
|
current learning rate) and used a reward signal derived from validation |
|
performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to |
|
incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation |
|
interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or |
|
heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char |
|
enwik8, text8). |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Next, let's implement the next experiment. For this experiment, we will use a |
|
different reward signal for the Q-learning agent. Instead of using the negative |
|
validation loss as the reward, we will use the improvement in validation loss as |
|
the reward. |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
reward = -losses["val"] # Reward is negative validation loss |
|
======= |
|
reward = best_val_loss - losses["val"] # Reward is improvement in |
|
validation loss |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Now, you can run the next experiment with the command: |
|
|
|
|
|
python experiment.py --out_dir=run_3 |
|
|
|
12718 prompt tokens, 1173 completion tokens, $0.081185 cost |
|
|
|
Applied edit to q_learning_agent.py |
|
Applied edit to notes.txt |
|
First, let's update the `notes.txt` file to include the results and description for Run 2. |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
## Run 1: Q-learning with initial learning rate adaptation |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8112714489301046, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4664853016535442, 'total_train_time_mean': 76.33582202593486, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 680.220956113138}, 'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9324554204940796, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.0050768852233887, 'total_train_time_mean': 799.199625492096, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 690.1664700419294}, 'text8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9926028251647949, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9795507192611694, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.1075961589813, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 691.9504174462957}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward signal derived from validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
======= |
|
## Run 1: Q-learning with initial learning rate adaptation |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8112714489301046, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4664853016535442, 'total_train_time_mean': 76.33582202593486, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 680.220956113138}, 'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9324554204940796, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.0050768852233887, 'total_train_time_mean': 799.199625492096, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 690.1664700419294}, 'text8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9926028251647949, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9795507192611694, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.1075961589813, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 691.9504174462957}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward signal derived from validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
|
|
## Run 2: Q-learning with different initial learning rates |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8047561645507812, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4602874914805095, 'total_train_time_mean': 76.26222737630208, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 675.5019470493302}, 'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9224221706390381, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9933806657791138, 'total_train_time_mean': 806.1875951290131, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 682.6881990162254}, 'text8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9798105955123901, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9613448977470398, 'total_train_time_mean': 807.7686207294464, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 652.3187905322042}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation with different initial learning rates. The initial learning rate was set to 2e-3 for shakespeare_char and 1e-3 for enwik8 and text8. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward signal derived from validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
``` |
|
|
|
Next, let's implement the next experiment. For this experiment, we will use a different reward signal for the Q-learning agent. Instead of using the negative validation loss as the reward, we will use the improvement in validation loss as the reward. |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
reward = -losses["val"] # Reward is negative validation loss |
|
======= |
|
reward = best_val_loss - losses["val"] # Reward is improvement in validation loss |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
``` |
|
|
|
Now, you can run the next experiment with the command: |
|
```sh |
|
python experiment.py --out_dir=run_3 |
|
``` |
|
Let's first update the notes.txt file with the results and description for Run |
|
3. |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Run 3: Q-learning with reward signal based on improvement in validation loss |
|
|
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8062439958254496, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.461962143580119, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
75.80110216140747, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 668.3102066342188}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9246289730072021, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9944368004798889, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.9592888355255, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 688.6266631351763}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9843199849128723, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.961367666721344, 'total_train_time_mean': 791.6123127937317, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 658.961942825521}} Description: This run |
|
implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation with a different |
|
reward signal. Instead of using the negative validation loss as the reward, the |
|
improvement in validation loss was used. The Q-learning agent adjusted the |
|
learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning |
|
rate) and used the reward signal derived from the improvement in validation |
|
performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to |
|
incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation |
|
interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or |
|
heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, |
|
enwik8, text8). |
|
|
|
▌ ▌ ▌ ▌ ▌ ▌ ▌ REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Next, let's propose the next experiment. For Run 4, we will use a different |
|
exploration strategy for the Q-learning agent. Instead of using a fixed epsilo |
|
value for exploration, we will use an epsilon decay strategy where epsilon |
|
decreases over time. |
|
|
|
Here are the changes needed: |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
self.epsilon = epsilon |
|
======= |
|
self.epsilon = epsilon |
|
self.initial_epsilon = epsilon |
|
self.epsilon_decay = 0.99 # Decay rate for epsilon |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
if np.random.rand() < self.epsilon: |
|
======= |
|
if np.random.rand() < self.epsilon: |
|
self.epsilon *= self.epsilon_decay # Decay epsilon |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Now, you can run the next experiment with the command: |
|
|
|
|
|
python experiment.py --out_dir=run_4 |
|
|
|
11638 prompt tokens, 584 completion tokens, $0.066950 cost |
|
|
|
The LLM did not conform to the edit format. |
|
https://aider.chat/docs/troubleshooting/edit-errors.html |
|
|
|
Let's first update the `notes.txt` file with the results and description for Run |
|
3. |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
``` |
|
|
|
## Run 3: Q-learning with reward signal based on improvement in validation loss |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8062439958254496, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.461962143580119, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
75.80110216140747, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 668.3102066342188}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9246289730072021, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9944368004798889, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.9592888355255, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 688.6266631351763}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9843199849128723, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.961367666721344, 'total_train_time_mean': 791.6123127937317, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 658.961942825521}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation with a different reward signal. Instead of using the negative |
|
validation loss as the reward, the improvement in validation loss was used. The |
|
Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state |
|
(validation loss, current learning rate) and used the reward signal derived from |
|
the improvement in validation performance to update the Q-values. The training |
|
loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate |
|
at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model |
|
using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets |
|
(shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
^^^ Expected `=======` not >>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
Let's update the notes.txt file with the results and description for Run 3 |
|
correctly. |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
## Run 2: Q-learning with different initial learning rates |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8047561645507812, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4602874914805095, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
76.26222737630208, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 675.5019470493302}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9224221706390381, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9933806657791138, 'total_train_time_mean': 806.1875951290131, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 682.6881990162254}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9798105955123901, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9613448977470398, 'total_train_time_mean': 807.7686207294464, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 652.3187905322042}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation with different initial learning rates. The initial learning rate wa |
|
set to 2e-3 for shakespeare_char and 1e-3 for enwik8 and text8. The Q-learning |
|
agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, |
|
current learning rate) and used a reward signal derived from validation |
|
performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to |
|
incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation |
|
interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or |
|
heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char |
|
enwik8, text8). |
|
======= |
|
## Run 2: Q-learning with different initial learning rates |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8047561645507812, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4602874914805095, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
76.26222737630208, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 675.5019470493302}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9224221706390381, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9933806657791138, 'total_train_time_mean': 806.1875951290131, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 682.6881990162254}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9798105955123901, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9613448977470398, 'total_train_time_mean': 807.7686207294464, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 652.3187905322042}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation with different initial learning rates. The initial learning rate wa |
|
set to 2e-3 for shakespeare_char and 1e-3 for enwik8 and text8. The Q-learning |
|
agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, |
|
current learning rate) and used a reward signal derived from validation |
|
performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to |
|
incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation |
|
interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or |
|
heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char |
|
enwik8, text8). |
|
|
|
## Run 3: Q-learning with reward signal based on improvement in validation los |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8062439958254496, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.461962143580119, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
75.80110216140747, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 668.3102066342188}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9246289730072021, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9944368004798889, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.9592888355255, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 688.6266631351763}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9843199849128723, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.961367666721344, 'total_train_time_mean': 791.6123127937317, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 658.961942825521}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation with a different reward signal. Instead of using the negative |
|
validation loss as the reward, the improvement in validation loss was used. Th |
|
Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state |
|
(validation loss, current learning rate) and used the reward signal derived fr |
|
the improvement in validation performance to update the Q-values. The training |
|
loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning ra |
|
at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model |
|
using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets |
|
(shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Next, let's propose the next experiment. For Run 4, we will use a different |
|
exploration strategy for the Q-learning agent. Instead of using a fixed epsilon |
|
value for exploration, we will use an epsilon decay strategy where epsilon |
|
decreases over time. |
|
|
|
Here are the changes needed: |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
self.epsilon = epsilon |
|
======= |
|
self.epsilon = epsilon |
|
self.initial_epsilon = epsilon |
|
self.epsilon_decay = 0.99 # Decay rate for epsilon |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
if np.random.rand() < self.epsilon: |
|
======= |
|
if np.random.rand() < self.epsilon: |
|
self.epsilon *= self.epsilon_decay # Decay epsilon |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Now, you can run the next experiment with the command: |
|
|
|
|
|
python experiment.py --out_dir=run_4 |
|
|
|
12629 prompt tokens, 1303 completion tokens, $0.082690 cost |
|
|
|
Applied edit to q_learning_agent.py |
|
Applied edit to notes.txt |
|
Let's update the `notes.txt` file with the results and description for Run 3 correctly. |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
## Run 2: Q-learning with different initial learning rates |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8047561645507812, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4602874914805095, 'total_train_time_mean': 76.26222737630208, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 675.5019470493302}, 'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9224221706390381, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9933806657791138, 'total_train_time_mean': 806.1875951290131, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 682.6881990162254}, 'text8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9798105955123901, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9613448977470398, 'total_train_time_mean': 807.7686207294464, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 652.3187905322042}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation with different initial learning rates. The initial learning rate was set to 2e-3 for shakespeare_char and 1e-3 for enwik8 and text8. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward signal derived from validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
======= |
|
## Run 2: Q-learning with different initial learning rates |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8047561645507812, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4602874914805095, 'total_train_time_mean': 76.26222737630208, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 675.5019470493302}, 'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9224221706390381, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9933806657791138, 'total_train_time_mean': 806.1875951290131, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 682.6881990162254}, 'text8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9798105955123901, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9613448977470398, 'total_train_time_mean': 807.7686207294464, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 652.3187905322042}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation with different initial learning rates. The initial learning rate was set to 2e-3 for shakespeare_char and 1e-3 for enwik8 and text8. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward signal derived from validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
|
|
## Run 3: Q-learning with reward signal based on improvement in validation loss |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8062439958254496, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.461962143580119, 'total_train_time_mean': 75.80110216140747, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 668.3102066342188}, 'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9246289730072021, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9944368004798889, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.9592888355255, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 688.6266631351763}, 'text8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9843199849128723, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.961367666721344, 'total_train_time_mean': 791.6123127937317, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 658.961942825521}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation with a different reward signal. Instead of using the negative validation loss as the reward, the improvement in validation loss was used. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used the reward signal derived from the improvement in validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
``` |
|
|
|
Next, let's propose the next experiment. For Run 4, we will use a different exploration strategy for the Q-learning agent. Instead of using a fixed epsilon value for exploration, we will use an epsilon decay strategy where epsilon decreases over time. |
|
|
|
Here are the changes needed: |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
self.epsilon = epsilon |
|
======= |
|
self.epsilon = epsilon |
|
self.initial_epsilon = epsilon |
|
self.epsilon_decay = 0.99 # Decay rate for epsilon |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
``` |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
if np.random.rand() < self.epsilon: |
|
======= |
|
if np.random.rand() < self.epsilon: |
|
self.epsilon *= self.epsilon_decay # Decay epsilon |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
``` |
|
|
|
Now, you can run the next experiment with the command: |
|
```bash |
|
python experiment.py --out_dir=run_4 |
|
``` |
|
Let's first update the notes.txt file with the results and description for Run |
|
4. |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Run 3: Q-learning with reward signal based on improvement in validation loss |
|
|
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8062439958254496, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.461962143580119, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
75.80110216140747, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 668.3102066342188}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9246289730072021, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9944368004798889, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.9592888355255, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 688.6266631351763}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9843199849128723, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.961367666721344, 'total_train_time_mean': 791.6123127937317, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 658.961942825521}} Description: This run |
|
implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation with a different |
|
reward signal. Instead of using the negative validation loss as the reward, the |
|
improvement in validation loss was used. The Q-learning agent adjusted the |
|
learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning |
|
rate) and used the reward signal derived from the improvement in validation |
|
performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to |
|
incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation |
|
interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or |
|
heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, |
|
enwik8, text8). |
|
|
|
|
|
Run 4: Q-learning with epsilon decay strategy |
|
|
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.7984780073165894, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.463551680246989, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
79.24612506230672, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 617.9132836431749}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.925983190536499, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9917866587638855, 'total_train_time_mean': 852.1484353542328, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 605.0617699125265}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9827583432197571, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9615200161933899, 'total_train_time_mean': 846.4471461772919, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 613.2623906747798}} Description: This |
|
run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation with an epsilon |
|
decay strategy. Instead of using a fixed epsilon value for exploration, an |
|
epsilon decay strategy was used where epsilon decreases over time. The |
|
Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state |
|
(validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward signal derived from |
|
validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to |
|
incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation |
|
interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or |
|
heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, |
|
enwik8, text8). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Next, let's propose the next experiment. We will use a different discount factor |
|
(gamma) for the Q-learning agent to see how it affects the learning rate |
|
adaptation. |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
def __init__(self, lr=0.1, gamma=0.9, epsilon=0.1): |
|
======= |
|
def __init__(self, lr=0.1, gamma=0.95, epsilon=0.1): |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Now, you can run the next experiment with the command: |
|
|
|
|
|
python experiment.py --out_dir=run_5 |
|
|
|
12168 prompt tokens, 864 completion tokens, $0.073800 cost |
|
|
|
The LLM did not conform to the edit format. |
|
https://aider.chat/docs/troubleshooting/edit-errors.html |
|
|
|
Let's first update the `notes.txt` file with the results and description for Run |
|
4. |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
``` |
|
## Run 3: Q-learning with reward signal based on improvement in validation loss |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8062439958254496, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.461962143580119, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
75.80110216140747, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 668.3102066342188}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9246289730072021, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9944368004798889, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.9592888355255, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 688.6266631351763}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9843199849128723, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.961367666721344, 'total_train_time_mean': 791.6123127937317, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 658.961942825521}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation with a different reward signal. Instead of using the negative |
|
validation loss as the reward, the improvement in validation loss was used. The |
|
Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state |
|
(validation loss, current learning rate) and used the reward signal derived from |
|
the improvement in validation performance to update the Q-values. The training |
|
loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate |
|
at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model |
|
using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets |
|
(shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
|
|
## Run 4: Q-learning with epsilon decay strategy |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.7984780073165894, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.463551680246989, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
79.24612506230672, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 617.9132836431749}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.925983190536499, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9917866587638855, 'total_train_time_mean': 852.1484353542328, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 605.0617699125265}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9827583432197571, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9615200161933899, 'total_train_time_mean': 846.4471461772919, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 613.2623906747798}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation with an epsilon decay strategy. Instead of using a fixed epsilon |
|
value for exploration, an epsilon decay strategy was used where epsilon |
|
decreases over time. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on |
|
the current state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward |
|
signal derived from validation performance to update the Q-values. The training |
|
loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate |
|
at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model |
|
using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets |
|
(shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
``` |
|
``` |
|
|
|
Next, let's propose the next experiment. We will use a different discount factor |
|
(gamma) for the Q-learning agent to see how it affects the learning rate |
|
adaptation. |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
|
|
^^^ Expected `=======` not <<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
Let's first update the notes.txt file with the results and description for Run |
|
4. |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
## Run 3: Q-learning with reward signal based on improvement in validation los |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8062439958254496, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.461962143580119, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
75.80110216140747, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 668.3102066342188}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9246289730072021, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9944368004798889, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.9592888355255, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 688.6266631351763}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9843199849128723, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.961367666721344, 'total_train_time_mean': 791.6123127937317, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 658.961942825521}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation with a different reward signal. Instead of using the negative |
|
validation loss as the reward, the improvement in validation loss was used. Th |
|
Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state |
|
(validation loss, current learning rate) and used the reward signal derived fr |
|
the improvement in validation performance to update the Q-values. The training |
|
loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning ra |
|
at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model |
|
using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets |
|
(shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
======= |
|
## Run 3: Q-learning with reward signal based on improvement in validation los |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8062439958254496, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.461962143580119, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
75.80110216140747, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 668.3102066342188}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9246289730072021, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9944368004798889, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.9592888355255, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 688.6266631351763}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9843199849128723, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.961367666721344, 'total_train_time_mean': 791.6123127937317, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 658.961942825521}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation with a different reward signal. Instead of using the negative |
|
validation loss as the reward, the improvement in validation loss was used. Th |
|
Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state |
|
(validation loss, current learning rate) and used the reward signal derived fr |
|
the improvement in validation performance to update the Q-values. The training |
|
loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning ra |
|
at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model |
|
using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets |
|
(shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
|
|
## Run 4: Q-learning with epsilon decay strategy |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.7984780073165894, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.463551680246989, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
79.24612506230672, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 617.9132836431749}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.925983190536499, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9917866587638855, 'total_train_time_mean': 852.1484353542328, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 605.0617699125265}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9827583432197571, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.9615200161933899, 'total_train_time_mean': 846.4471461772919, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 613.2623906747798}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate |
|
adaptation with an epsilon decay strategy. Instead of using a fixed epsilon |
|
value for exploration, an epsilon decay strategy was used where epsilon |
|
decreases over time. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on |
|
the current state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward |
|
signal derived from validation performance to update the Q-values. The trainin |
|
loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning ra |
|
at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model |
|
using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets |
|
(shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Next, let's propose the next experiment. We will use a different discount factor |
|
(gamma) for the Q-learning agent to see how it affects the learning rate |
|
adaptation. |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
def __init__(self, lr=0.1, gamma=0.9, epsilon=0.1): |
|
======= |
|
def __init__(self, lr=0.1, gamma=0.95, epsilon=0.1): |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
Now, you can run the next experiment with the command: |
|
|
|
|
|
python experiment.py --out_dir=run_5 |
|
|
|
13832 prompt tokens, 1218 completion tokens, $0.087430 cost |
|
|
|
Applied edit to q_learning_agent.py |
|
Applied edit to notes.txt |
|
Let's first update the `notes.txt` file with the results and description for Run 4. |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
## Run 3: Q-learning with reward signal based on improvement in validation loss |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8062439958254496, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.461962143580119, 'total_train_time_mean': 75.80110216140747, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 668.3102066342188}, 'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9246289730072021, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9944368004798889, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.9592888355255, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 688.6266631351763}, 'text8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9843199849128723, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.961367666721344, 'total_train_time_mean': 791.6123127937317, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 658.961942825521}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation with a different reward signal. Instead of using the negative validation loss as the reward, the improvement in validation loss was used. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used the reward signal derived from the improvement in validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
======= |
|
## Run 3: Q-learning with reward signal based on improvement in validation loss |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8062439958254496, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.461962143580119, 'total_train_time_mean': 75.80110216140747, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 668.3102066342188}, 'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9246289730072021, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9944368004798889, 'total_train_time_mean': 796.9592888355255, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 688.6266631351763}, 'text8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9843199849128723, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.961367666721344, 'total_train_time_mean': 791.6123127937317, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 658.961942825521}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation with a different reward signal. Instead of using the negative validation loss as the reward, the improvement in validation loss was used. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used the reward signal derived from the improvement in validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
|
|
## Run 4: Q-learning with epsilon decay strategy |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.7984780073165894, 'best_val_loss_mean': 1.463551680246989, 'total_train_time_mean': 79.24612506230672, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 617.9132836431749}, 'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.925983190536499, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9917866587638855, 'total_train_time_mean': 852.1484353542328, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 605.0617699125265}, 'text8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.9827583432197571, 'best_val_loss_mean': 0.9615200161933899, 'total_train_time_mean': 846.4471461772919, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 613.2623906747798}} |
|
Description: This run implemented Q-learning for dynamic learning rate adaptation with an epsilon decay strategy. Instead of using a fixed epsilon value for exploration, an epsilon decay strategy was used where epsilon decreases over time. The Q-learning agent adjusted the learning rate based on the current state (validation loss, current learning rate) and used a reward signal derived from validation performance to update the Q-values. The training loop was modified to incorporate the RL agent's adjustments to the learning rate at each evaluation interval. The results were compared with the baseline model using static or heuristic-based learning rate schedules on multiple datasets (shakespeare_char, enwik8, text8). |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
``` |
|
|
|
Next, let's propose the next experiment. We will use a different discount factor (gamma) for the Q-learning agent to see how it affects the learning rate adaptation. |
|
|
|
q_learning_agent.py |
|
```python |
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
def __init__(self, lr=0.1, gamma=0.9, epsilon=0.1): |
|
======= |
|
def __init__(self, lr=0.1, gamma=0.95, epsilon=0.1): |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
``` |
|
|
|
Now, you can run the next experiment with the command: |
|
```sh |
|
python experiment.py --out_dir=run_5 |
|
``` |
|
To modify plot.py to generate the most relevant plots for the final writeup and |
|
fill in the "labels" dictionary with the correct names for each run, we will: |
|
|
|
1 Update the labels dictionary to include all relevant runs. |
|
2 Ensure that the plots are generated for each dataset and saved with |
|
appropriate filenames. |
|
|
|
Here are the SEARCH/REPLACE blocks: |
|
|
|
plot.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
labels = { |
|
"run_0": "Baselines", |
|
======= |
|
labels = { |
|
"run_0": "Baseline", |
|
"run_1": "Q-learning with initial learning rate adaptation", |
|
"run_2": "Q-learning with different initial learning rates", |
|
"run_3": "Q-learning with reward signal based on improvement in validation |
|
loss", |
|
"run_4": "Q-learning with epsilon decay strategy", |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
} |
|
|
|
|
|
plot.py |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
# Plot 1: Line plot of training loss for each dataset across the runs with |
|
labels |
|
for dataset in datasets: |
|
plt.figure(figsize=(10, 6)) |
|
for i, run in enumerate(runs): |
|
iters = results_info[run][dataset]["iters"] |
|
mean = results_info[run][dataset]["train_loss"] |
|
sterr = results_info[run][dataset]["train_loss_sterr"] |
|
plt.plot(iters, mean, label=labels[run], color=colors[i]) |
|
plt.fill_between(iters, mean - sterr, mean + sterr, color=colors[i], |
|
alpha=0.2) |
|
|
|
plt.title(f"Training Loss Across Runs for {dataset} Dataset") |
|
plt.xlabel("Iteration") |
|
plt.ylabel("Training Loss") |
|
plt.legend() |
|
plt.grid(True, which="both", ls="-", alpha=0.2) |
|
plt.tight_layout() |
|
plt.savefig(f"train_loss_{dataset}.png") |
|
plt.close() |
|
|
|
# Plot 2: Line plot of validation loss for each dataset across the runs with |
|
labels |
|
for dataset in datasets: |
|
plt.figure(figsize=(10, 6)) |
|
for i, run in enumerate(runs): |
|
iters = results_info[run][dataset]["iters"] |
|
mean = results_info[run][dataset]["val_loss"] |
|
sterr = results_info[run][dataset]["val_loss_sterr"] |
|
plt.plot(iters, mean, label=labels[run], color=colors[i]) |
|
plt.fill_between(iters, mean - sterr, mean + sterr, color=colors[i], |
|
alpha=0.2) |
|
|
|
plt.title(f"Validation Loss Across Runs for {dataset} Dataset") |
|
plt.xlabel("Iteration") |
|
plt.ylabel("Validation Loss") |
|
plt.legend() |
|
plt.grid(True, which="both", ls="-", alpha=0.2) |
|
plt.tight_layout() |
|
plt.savefig(f"val_loss_{dataset}.png") |
|
plt.close() |
|
======= |
|
# Plot 1: Line plot of training loss for each dataset across the runs with |
|
labels |
|
for dataset in datasets: |
|
plt.figure(figsize=(10, 6)) |
|
for i, run in enumerate(runs): |
|
iters = results_info[run][dataset]["iters"] |
|
mean = results_info[run][dataset]["train_loss"] |
|
sterr = results_info[run][dataset]["train_loss_sterr"] |
|
plt.plot(iters, mean, label=labels[run], color=colors[i]) |
|
plt.fill_between(iters, mean - sterr, mean + sterr, color=colors[i], |
|
alpha=0.2) |
|
|
|
plt.title(f"Training Loss Across Runs for {dataset} Dataset") |
|
plt.xlabel("Iteration") |
|
plt.ylabel("Training Loss") |
|
plt.legend() |
|
plt.grid(True, which="both", ls="-", alpha=0.2) |
|
plt.tight_layout() |
|
plt.savefig(f"train_loss_{dataset}.png") |
|
plt.close() |
|
|
|
# Plot 2: Line plot of validation loss for each dataset across the runs with |
|
labels |
|
for dataset in datasets: |
|
plt.figure(figsize=(10, 6)) |
|
for i, run in enumerate(runs): |
|
iters = results_info[run][dataset]["iters"] |
|
mean = results_info[run][dataset]["val_loss"] |
|
sterr = results_info[run][dataset]["val_loss_sterr"] |
|
plt.plot(iters, mean, label=labels[run], color=colors[i]) |
|
plt.fill_between(iters, mean - sterr, mean + sterr, color=colors[i], |
|
alpha=0.2) |
|
|
|
plt.title(f"Validation Loss Across Runs for {dataset} Dataset") |
|
plt.xlabel("Iteration") |
|
plt.ylabel("Validation Loss") |
|
plt.legend() |
|
plt.grid(True, which="both", ls="-", alpha=0.2) |
|
plt.tight_layout() |
|
plt.savefig(f"val_loss_{dataset}.png") |
|
plt.close() |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
These changes will ensure that the plots are generated for each dataset and |
|
saved with appropriate filenames, and the labels dictionary will include all |
|
relevant runs. |
|
12063 prompt tokens, 1043 completion tokens, $0.075960 cost |
|
|
|
Applied edit to plot.py |
|
/home/anon/ai_scientist/venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/numpy/core/fromnumeric.py:3504: RuntimeWarning: Mean of empty slice. |
|
return _methods._mean(a, axis=axis, dtype=dtype, |
|
/home/anon/ai_scientist/venv/lib/python3.10/site-packages/numpy/core/_methods.py:129: RuntimeWarning: invalid value encountered in scalar divide |
|
ret = ret.dtype.type(ret / rcount) |
|
|
|
Here are the changes to notes.txt to include descriptions of what each plot |
|
shows along with the filename of the figure: |
|
|
|
notes.txt |
|
|
|
|
|
<<<<<<< SEARCH |
|
## Run 0: Baseline |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8186181902885437, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4654763221740723, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
77.26942734718322, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 666.5076153519527}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.930223822593689, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
1.0055421590805054, 'total_train_time_mean': 819.4551751613617, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 671.9918599180683}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 1.0013301372528076, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.979989230632782, 'total_train_time_mean': 801.224205493927, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 671.5678332249411}} |
|
Description: Baseline results. |
|
======= |
|
## Run 0: Baseline |
|
Results: {'shakespeare_char': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.8186181902885437, |
|
'best_val_loss_mean': 1.4654763221740723, 'total_train_time_mean': |
|
77.26942734718322, 'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 666.5076153519527}, |
|
'enwik8': {'final_train_loss_mean': 0.930223822593689, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
1.0055421590805054, 'total_train_time_mean': 819.4551751613617, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 671.9918599180683}, 'text8': |
|
{'final_train_loss_mean': 1.0013301372528076, 'best_val_loss_mean': |
|
0.979989230632782, 'total_train_time_mean': 801.224205493927, |
|
'avg_inference_tokens_per_second_mean': 671.5678332249411}} |
|
Description: Baseline results. |
|
|
|
Plot Descriptions: |
|
1. Training Loss Across Runs for shakespeare_char Dataset: This plot shows the |
|
training loss over iterations for the shakespeare_char dataset across differen |
|
runs. It helps in understanding how the training loss decreases over time for |
|
each run. Filename: train_loss_shakespeare_char.png |
|
2. Validation Loss Across Runs for shakespeare_char Dataset: This plot shows t |
|
validation loss over iterations for the shakespeare_char dataset across |
|
different runs. It helps in understanding how the validation loss decreases ov |
|
time for each run. Filename: val_loss_shakespeare_char.png |
|
3. Training Loss Across Runs for enwik8 Dataset: This plot shows the training |
|
loss over iterations for the enwik8 dataset across different runs. It helps in |
|
understanding how the training loss decreases over time for each run. Filename |
|
train_loss_enwik8.png |
|
4. Validation Loss Across Runs for enwik8 Dataset: This plot shows the |
|
validation loss over iterations for the enwik8 dataset across different runs. |
|
helps in understanding how the validation loss decreases over time for each ru |
|
Filename: val_loss_enwik8.png |
|
5. Training Loss Across Runs for text8 Dataset: This plot shows the training |
|
loss over iterations for the text8 dataset across different runs. It helps in |
|
understanding how the training loss decreases over time for each run. Filename |
|
train_loss_text8.png |
|
6. Validation Loss Across Runs for text8 Dataset: This plot shows the validati |
|
loss over iterations for the text8 dataset across different runs. It helps in |
|
understanding how the validation loss decreases over time for each run. |
|
Filename: val_loss_text8.png |
|
>>>>>>> REPLACE |
|
|
|
|
|
This update will ensure that the notes.txt file contains detailed descriptions |
|
of what each plot shows along with the filenames of the figures. |
|
13240 prompt tokens, 834 completion tokens, $0.078710 cost |
|
|
|
Applied edit to notes.txt |
|
|