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

Add support for o200k tokenization #16

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Sep 25, 2024
Merged

Conversation

hendrikvanantwerpen
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@hendrikvanantwerpen hendrikvanantwerpen self-assigned this Sep 24, 2024
Comment on lines 208 to 210
if let Some(j) = bytes_hash_to_token.insert(hash_bytes(&token), i as u32) {
eprintln!("collision: ({i}, {j})");
}
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should the function return an error instead when this happens?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If this happens, the assertion below the loop will fail. I wonder if we want to provide a way to specify the factor as part of the API, if anyone wants to construct a BPE from their own dictionary. The hard-coded constant might make it harder to reuse this if users bring their own tokens. But I'll save that for a follow-up PR.

/// 3. Run [`update_token_dicts`] tests below to update data files.
#[test]
#[ignore = "run manually to find a suitable hash factor"]
fn find_hash_factor() {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

:)

#[test]
fn test_serialize() {
#[ignore = "run manually to update data files"]
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

in principle, we could let this test run normally, since it will fix the broken data file (and one will see in the diff that something has changed)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, let's do that.

Copy link
Collaborator

@aneubeck aneubeck left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What are the benchmark numbers for o200k?
Did things get slower?

@hendrikvanantwerpen
Copy link
Contributor Author

What are the benchmark numbers for o200k?
Did things get slower?

Performance characteristics look similar.

cl100k

image

o200k

image

@hendrikvanantwerpen hendrikvanantwerpen merged commit 3a14632 into main Sep 25, 2024
3 checks passed
@hendrikvanantwerpen hendrikvanantwerpen deleted the add-o200k-tokens branch September 25, 2024 12:09
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