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 was archived by the owner on Oct 31, 2023. It is now read-only.
Using the checkpoints you released, I am able to get the result of SEAL (LM+FM, intersective) in Table 3. However, I am wondering how to obtain the result of SEAL (LM, |n| = 5) and SEAL (LM+FM) in the table. There are several flags in SEALSearcher in retrieval.py. Which ones should be set?
In addition, I notice that in retrieval.py, the found_keys are always rescored by rk.rescore_keys. May I know what does this function do? I don't seem to find it in the paper.
Thanks in advance!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
rescore_keys simplifies scoring at the expense of compute. Instead of getting the scores directly out of the beam search, we refeed the generated ngrams to the decoder and recompute logprobs. It shouldn't change the performances.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Thanks for your great work!
Using the checkpoints you released, I am able to get the result of SEAL (LM+FM, intersective) in Table 3. However, I am wondering how to obtain the result of SEAL (LM, |n| = 5) and SEAL (LM+FM) in the table. There are several flags in SEALSearcher in
retrieval.py
. Which ones should be set?In addition, I notice that in
retrieval.py
, the found_keys are always rescored byrk.rescore_keys
. May I know what does this function do? I don't seem to find it in the paper.Thanks in advance!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: