I was initially pretty sceptical about Meta's Coconut paper [1] because the largest perf gains were reported on toy linguistic problems. However, these results on machine translation are pretty impressive!
* Iteratively sample CoTs from the model, using a mix of different search strategies. This gives you something like Stream of Search via prompting. * Verify correctness of each CoT using GPT-4o (needed because exact match doesn't work well in medicine where there are lots of aliases) * Use GPT-4o to reformat the concatenated CoTs into a single stream that includes smooth transitions like "hmm, wait" etc that one sees in o1 * Use the resulting data for SFT & RL * Use sparse rewards from GPT-4o to guide RL training. They find RL gives an average ~3 point boost across medical benchmarks and SFT on this data already gives a strong improvement.
Applying this strategy to other domains could be quite promising, provided the training data can be formulated with verifiable problems!
We outperform Llama 70B with Llama 3B on hard math by scaling test-time compute 🔥
How? By combining step-wise reward models with tree search algorithms :)
We show that smol models can match or exceed the performance of their much larger siblings when given enough "time to think"
We're open sourcing the full recipe and sharing a detailed blog post.
In our blog post we cover:
📈 Compute-optimal scaling: How we implemented DeepMind's recipe to boost the mathematical capabilities of open models at test-time.
🎄 Diverse Verifier Tree Search (DVTS): An unpublished extension we developed to the verifier-guided tree search technique. This simple yet effective method improves diversity and delivers better performance, particularly at large test-time compute budgets.
🧭 Search and Learn: A lightweight toolkit for implementing search strategies with LLMs and built for speed with vLLM
We applied the same data-driven approach that led to SOTA English performance in🍷 FineWeb to thousands of languages.
🥂 FineWeb2 has 8TB of compressed text data and outperforms other multilingual datasets in our experiments.
The dataset is released under the permissive 📜 ODC-By 1.0 license, and the 💻 code to reproduce it and our evaluations is public.
We will very soon announce a big community project, and are working on a 📝 blogpost walking you through the entire dataset creation process. Stay tuned!
How do I test an LLM for my unique needs? If you work in finance, law, or medicine, generic benchmarks are not enough. This blog post uses Argilla, Distilllabel and 🌤️Lighteval to generate evaluation dataset and evaluate models.
🚨 How green is your model? 🌱 Introducing a new feature in the Comparator tool: Environmental Impact for responsible #LLM research! 👉 open-llm-leaderboard/comparator Now, you can not only compare models by performance, but also by their environmental footprint!
🌍 The Comparator calculates CO₂ emissions during evaluation and shows key model characteristics: evaluation score, number of parameters, architecture, precision, type... 🛠️ Make informed decisions about your model's impact on the planet and join the movement towards greener AI!
🚀 New feature of the Comparator of the 🤗 Open LLM Leaderboard: now compare models with their base versions & derivatives (finetunes, adapters, etc.). Perfect for tracking how adjustments affect performance & seeing innovations in action. Dive deeper into the leaderboard!
🛠️ Here's how to use it: 1. Select your model from the leaderboard. 2. Load its model tree. 3. Choose any base & derived models (adapters, finetunes, merges, quantizations) for comparison. 4. Press Load. See side-by-side performance metrics instantly!
Ready to dive in? 🏆 Try the 🤗 Open LLM Leaderboard Comparator now! See how models stack up against their base versions and derivatives to understand fine-tuning and other adjustments. Easier model analysis for better insights! Check it out here: open-llm-leaderboard/comparator 🌐
Dive into multi-model evaluations, pinpoint the best model for your needs, and explore insights across top open LLMs all in one place. Ready to level up your model comparison game?
🚨 Instruct-tuning impacts models differently across families! Qwen2.5-72B-Instruct excels on IFEval but struggles with MATH-Hard, while Llama-3.1-70B-Instruct avoids MATH performance loss! Why? Can they follow the format in examples? 📊 Compare models: open-llm-leaderboard/comparator