Update README.md
Browse files
README.md
CHANGED
@@ -19,13 +19,13 @@ These models are selected with consideration for the compute resource constraint
|
|
19 |
The proposed methodology involves the following steps:
|
20 |
1. Generate a response \\( y \\) for a given prompt \\( x \\) from a policy to be optimized, denoted as \\( \pi(y/x) \\).
|
21 |
2. Request the teacher to produce the corrected version \\( y' \\) of \\( y \\) denoted as \\( \tau(y'/y, x) \\). The teacher can be a human or a more precise LLM.
|
22 |
-
3. Assume a distribution function \\(f\\) that gives the likelihood of given text. For a prompt \\(x\\) and a corresponding response \\(y\\), \\(f(y, x)\\) can be written as \\(P(x)*P(y/x)\\). Log-likelyhood becomes \\(log(P(x)) + \log(P(y/x))\\).
|
23 |
4. Calculate the amount of correction required as a difference between the above distribution \\( f(y, x) - f(y', x) = \log(P(y/x)) - \log(P(y'/x)) \\).
|
24 |
5. The distribution \\(P\\) can be parameterized through the policy \\(\pi\\). For training this model, \\(P\\) is directly set to \\(\pi\\).
|
25 |
-
7. Optimize the policy \\(\pi\\) to minimize the necessary correction = \\(min_{\pi} ( log(\pi(y/x) - log(\pi(y’/x) )\\)
|
26 |
|
27 |
## Domain specific custom objective
|
28 |
-
This framework allows for the selection of \\(P\\), offering the flexibility to choose. If additional prior assumptions are available, they can be integrated. For instance, a prior concerning the distribution of response lengths could be included, limiting the model to produce responses of a certain length. If \\(P(y)\\) = \\(\pi(y)\\) * \\(l(y)\\), where \\(l(y)\\) is a prior specific to a target domain, the optimization function becomes \\(min_{\pi} ( log(\pi(y/x)) - log(\pi(y’/x) ) + log(l(y)) - log(l(y’)) \\). This indicates the aim to minimize the extra loss specific to the target domain.
|
29 |
|
30 |
## Connection with Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) and Contrastive Preference Learning (CPL)
|
31 |
The proposed approach has a direct connection to the [DPO](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2305.18290) and [CPL](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.13639) frameworks.
|
|
|
19 |
The proposed methodology involves the following steps:
|
20 |
1. Generate a response \\( y \\) for a given prompt \\( x \\) from a policy to be optimized, denoted as \\( \pi(y/x) \\).
|
21 |
2. Request the teacher to produce the corrected version \\( y' \\) of \\( y \\) denoted as \\( \tau(y'/y, x) \\). The teacher can be a human or a more precise LLM.
|
22 |
+
3. Assume a distribution function \\(f\\) that gives the likelihood of given text. For a prompt \\(x\\) and a corresponding response \\(y\\), \\(f(y, x)\\) can be written as \\(P(x)*P(y/x)\\). Log-likelyhood becomes \\(\log(P(x)) + \log(P(y/x))\\).
|
23 |
4. Calculate the amount of correction required as a difference between the above distribution \\( f(y, x) - f(y', x) = \log(P(y/x)) - \log(P(y'/x)) \\).
|
24 |
5. The distribution \\(P\\) can be parameterized through the policy \\(\pi\\). For training this model, \\(P\\) is directly set to \\(\pi\\).
|
25 |
+
7. Optimize the policy \\(\pi\\) to minimize the necessary correction = \\(min_{\pi} ( \log(\pi(y/x) - \log(\pi(y’/x) )\\)
|
26 |
|
27 |
## Domain specific custom objective
|
28 |
+
This framework allows for the selection of \\(P\\), offering the flexibility to choose. If additional prior assumptions are available, they can be integrated. For instance, a prior concerning the distribution of response lengths could be included, limiting the model to produce responses of a certain length. If \\(P(y)\\) = \\(\pi(y)\\) * \\(l(y)\\), where \\(l(y)\\) is a prior specific to a target domain, the optimization function becomes \\(min_{\pi} ( \log(\pi(y/x)) - \log(\pi(y’/x) ) + \log(l(y)) - \log(l(y’)) \\). This indicates the aim to minimize the extra loss specific to the target domain.
|
29 |
|
30 |
## Connection with Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) and Contrastive Preference Learning (CPL)
|
31 |
The proposed approach has a direct connection to the [DPO](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2305.18290) and [CPL](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.13639) frameworks.
|