-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 163
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
Weird inconsistency in Tokenizer vocabulary #151
Comments
I don't know exactly what's going on here yet, but I can confirm this file at also the following snippet shows the result upon loading the two tokenizers and encoding \u200b:
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Hello everyone!
I found a weird inconsistency in the tokenizer vocabulary. I wanted to ask why this could be happening.
I have loaded a tokenizer from HF:
If I run
The output is
[12882]
. However, taking a look at the vocabulary used for training (here), I cannot find the token\u200b
and the token id corresponds to a different stringThis seems to generally happen with unicode characters.
Why could this be happening?? I just want to make sure that the tokenizer I use for training is equivalent to the HF tokenizers since my training (as anticipated in your README) results in a weird tokenizer.
Thanks a lot :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: