Skip to content
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

Lyrics analyzer #742

Closed

Conversation

mergedmediaca
Copy link

Thank you for contributing an eval! ♥️

🚨 Please make sure your PR follows these guidelines, failure to follow the guidelines below will result in the PR being closed automatically. Note that even if the criteria are met, that does not guarantee the PR will be merged nor GPT-4 access granted. 🚨

PLEASE READ THIS:

In order for a PR to be merged, it must fail on GPT-4. We are aware that right now, users do not have access, so you will not be able to tell if the eval fails or not. Please run your eval with GPT-3.5-Turbo, but keep in mind as we run the eval, if GPT-4 gets higher than 90% on the eval, we will likely reject since GPT-4 is already capable of completing the task.

We plan to roll out a way for users submitting evals to see the eval performance on GPT-4 soon. Stay tuned! Until then, you will not be able to see the eval performance on GPT-4. Starting April 10, the minimum eval count is 15 samples, we hope this makes it easier to create and contribute evals.

Eval details 📑

Eval name

Lyrics Analyzer

Eval description

Its an eval that should be able to determine the song title based from the portion of the lyrics as an input regardless of language

What makes this a useful eval?

To help someone to recall the song name in case they forgot the title

Criteria for a good eval ✅

Below are some of the criteria we look for in a good eval. In general, we are seeking cases where the model does not do a good job despite being capable of generating a good response (note that there are some things large language models cannot do, so those would not make good evals).

Your eval should be:

  • Thematically consistent: The eval should be thematically consistent. We'd like to see a number of prompts all demonstrating some particular failure mode. For example, we can create an eval on cases where the model fails to reason about the physical world.
  • Contains failures where a human can do the task, but either GPT-4 or GPT-3.5-Turbo could not.
  • Includes good signal around what is the right behavior. This means either a correct answer for Basic evals or the Fact Model-graded eval, or an exhaustive rubric for evaluating answers for the Criteria Model-graded eval.
  • Include at least 15 high quality examples.

If there is anything else that makes your eval worth including, please document it below.

Unique eval value

Insert what makes your eval high quality that was not mentioned above. (Not required)

Eval structure 🏗️

Your eval should

  • Check that your data is in evals/registry/data/{name}
  • Check that your yaml is registered at evals/registry/evals/{name}.yaml
  • Ensure you have the right to use the data you submit via this eval

(For now, we will only be approving evals that use one of the existing eval classes. You may still write custom eval classes for your own cases, and we may consider merging them in the future.)

Final checklist 👀

Submission agreement

By contributing to Evals, you are agreeing to make your evaluation logic and data under the same MIT license as this repository. You must have adequate rights to upload any data used in an Eval. OpenAI reserves the right to use this data in future service improvements to our product. Contributions to OpenAI Evals will be subject to our usual Usage Policies (https://platform.openai.com/docs/usage-policies).

  • I agree that my submission will be made available under an MIT license and complies with OpenAI's usage policies.

Email address validation

If your submission is accepted, we will be granting GPT-4 access to a limited number of contributors. Access will be given to the email address associated with the merged pull request.

  • I acknowledge that GPT-4 access will only be granted, if applicable, to the email address used for my merged pull request.

Limited availability acknowledgement

We know that you might be excited to contribute to OpenAI's mission, help improve our models, and gain access to GPT-4. However, due to the requirements mentioned above and high volume of submissions, we will not be able to accept all submissions and thus not grant everyone who opens a PR GPT-4 access. We know this is disappointing, but we hope to set the right expectation before you open this PR.

  • I understand that opening a PR, even if it meets the requirements above, does not guarantee the PR will be merged nor GPT-4 access granted.

Submit eval

  • I have filled out all required fields in the evals PR form
  • (Ignore if not submitting code) I have run pip install pre-commit; pre-commit install and have verified that black, isort, and autoflake are running when I commit and push

Failure to fill out all required fields will result in the PR being closed.

Eval JSON data

Since we are using Git LFS, we are asking eval submitters to add in as many Eval Samples (at least 5) from their contribution here:

View evals in JSON

Eval

[{"role": "system", "content": "A hurricane of jacarandas Strangling figs (Big) Hanging vines (This is fine) Palma de cera fills the air as I climb And I push through What else can I do?", "name": "example_user"}, {"role": "system", "content": "What else can I do", "name": "example_assistant"}]
[{"role": "system", "content": "A whole new world A new fantastic point of view No one to tell us "No", or where to go Or say we're only dreaming", "name": "example_user"}, {"role": "system", "content": "A whole new world", "name": "example_assistant"}]

@Ein-Tim
Copy link
Contributor

Ein-Tim commented Apr 21, 2023

Merging this PR would close #390.

@jorge-openai
Copy link
Collaborator

Thank you for opening this PR, we're not accepting Evals that have custom code implementations at this moment (but we are accepting custom model-graded evals).

It seems like you submitted two different evals, we are asking to split PRs in these cases. It may be possible to rewrite one or both using an existing template?

Thanks.
Closing this PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants