You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 21, 2024. It is now read-only.
Hey! This is a very exciting piece of work. But I have a question about the implementation of the code. In train_gptj_toolformer.py, Why are the inputs to the model the same as the labels that need to be predicted ??? Such a objective seems to be a bit different from the objective——a standard language modeling objective, proposed in the original paper. If you're free, Would you mind elaborating on the issue a bit more? I want to make sure I understand it thoroughly.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Hey! This is a very exciting piece of work. But I have a question about the implementation of the code. In train_gptj_toolformer.py, Why are the inputs to the model the same as the labels that need to be predicted ??? Such a objective seems to be a bit different from the objective——a standard language modeling objective, proposed in the original paper. If you're free, Would you mind elaborating on the issue a bit more? I want to make sure I understand it thoroughly.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: