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

User prompt refactoring #442

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

User prompt refactoring #442

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

orangecode12
Copy link

prompt2.txt is an alternative User prompt. The primary objective was to enhance simultaneous anomaly comparison. To achieve this, a new step was incorporated into the main instructions, and the prompt's structure was slightly reorganized. Additionally, it was noted that sometimes the summary of the generated article included titles that were not further represented. This issue has been addressed as well.
If you have any questions, please, don't hesistate to ask.

prompt2.txt is an alternative User prompt. The primary objective was to enhance simultaneous anomaly comparison. To achieve this, a new step was incorporated into the main instructions, and the prompt's structure was slightly reorganized. Additionally, it was noted that sometimes the summary of the generated article included titles that were not further represented. This issue has been addressed as well.
@evgenydmitriev
Copy link
Contributor

@orangecode12, could you propose a change, rather than adding an orphaned file? This will help everyone to see what has actually been changed in the prompt. It would also help if you attach the comparison of your test results to illustrate the improvements.

@orangecode12
Copy link
Author

Hope, this is better. I also have another good version: the text is better, but it places all the pictures at the end of the article.

@evgenydmitriev
Copy link
Contributor

@orangecode12, could you explain the significance of renaming the metric variables?

@orangecode12
Copy link
Author

Thank you for the feedback. In fact it is possible even to delete "Name of the metric" rows. I've experimented a bit more with user prompt, but there is no significant enhancment in article. In my opinion, the only way is to add more trustfull information to the prompt. I see that you already have a "RAG implementation challenge", maybe I'll participate later, if it remains unsolved.

@evgenydmitriev
Copy link
Contributor

@orangecode12, I think you are overlooking the part where those variables are used for extracting data from Market Health API. Feel free to look into the functionality of the Market Health Reporter and either submit another solution for this challenge or to try another one.

@orangecode12
Copy link
Author

I understand that the data is supposed to come from the Market Health API. However, I haven't called the API because I expect deviations to be rare, making it challenging to find a representative data sample.

I assumed the example data in data/data1.json is from the Market Health API, which is why I renamed the metric variables accordingly.

@evgenydmitriev
Copy link
Contributor

I assumed the example data in data/data1.json is from the Market Health API, which is why I renamed the metric variables accordingly.

That's not the case. Please pay closer attention to the code. I would suggest doing a few tests with different prompts and posting the results here.

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.

2 participants