Image Textualization: An Automatic Framework for Creating Accurate and Detailed Image Descriptions
Paper
•
2406.07502
•
Published
•
1
AI & ML interests
📊 Creators of datasets with the most cumulative new downloads each month (users only, no orgs)
Recent Activity
View all activity
Sterzhang
authored
2
papers
23 days ago
Sterzhang
authored
a
paper
about 1 month ago
Post
3855
simple guide on the recipe for GRPO on Open-R1 which is built on top of TRL
I think FastAPI wrapper of vLLM with WeightSyncWorker is pretty cool feature. Also, we have many predefined reward functions out of the box!
I think FastAPI wrapper of vLLM with WeightSyncWorker is pretty cool feature. Also, we have many predefined reward functions out of the box!
- 5 replies
Post
2649
Mistral AI Small 3.1 24B is not only commercial free but also the best model in a single GPU deployment.
I packed up all the information you need to know in a single picture. Hope this helps! :)
I packed up all the information you need to know in a single picture. Hope this helps! :)
- 1 reply
Post
1584
Gemma 3 Release in a nutshell
(seems like function calling is not supported whereas the announcement said so)
(seems like function calling is not supported whereas the announcement said so)
mvaloatto
updated
a
Space
5 months ago
Post
3024
Simple Paper Review #5
I briefly reviewed the paper "SFT Memorizes, RL Generalizes," which compares SFT and RL in post-training of LLM/VLM from HKU, UC Berkeley, Google DeepMind, and New York University
The conclusion suggests SFT excels in memorization, while RL is better for generalization. However, since LLM/VLM should benefit humans beyond just generalization, a mix of SFT and RL is advisable. Typically, some SFT is followed by RL to understand prompt formats and enhance generalization through trial and error.
The study focused on one model, Llama-3.2-Vision-11B, using environments like General Points for arithmetic reasoning and V-IRL for spatial reasoning. Training data was used for both SFT and RL, with evaluations on in-distribution and out-of-distribution data to assess memorization and generalization.
I want to apply RL extensively, but it requires building a similar simulation environment. For domain-specific models, significant investment in creating a "playground" for the model is crucial, as the effort will directly influence the outcomes.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.17161
I briefly reviewed the paper "SFT Memorizes, RL Generalizes," which compares SFT and RL in post-training of LLM/VLM from HKU, UC Berkeley, Google DeepMind, and New York University
The conclusion suggests SFT excels in memorization, while RL is better for generalization. However, since LLM/VLM should benefit humans beyond just generalization, a mix of SFT and RL is advisable. Typically, some SFT is followed by RL to understand prompt formats and enhance generalization through trial and error.
The study focused on one model, Llama-3.2-Vision-11B, using environments like General Points for arithmetic reasoning and V-IRL for spatial reasoning. Training data was used for both SFT and RL, with evaluations on in-distribution and out-of-distribution data to assess memorization and generalization.
I want to apply RL extensively, but it requires building a similar simulation environment. For domain-specific models, significant investment in creating a "playground" for the model is crucial, as the effort will directly influence the outcomes.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.17161
Post
4443
A brief summary of the o3-mini
The OpenAI o3-mini model is a significant improvement over the o1-mini, reaching o1 performance levels. While generally good, its performance isn't universally better than previous models (o1, o1-prev.) or GPT-4o across all benchmarks. This means workflows should be re-evaluated with each model upgrade.
The o3-mini has "low," "medium," and "high" versions, with "low" being the base model used for benchmarking. It's speculated that the higher versions simply involve more processing. A fair comparison with other models like Gemini 2.0 Thinking or DeepSeek-R1 would likely need to use the "low" version and a similar "think more" mechanism.
The system card is recommended reading due to its comprehensive benchmark data.
https://openai.com/index/openai-o3-mini/
The OpenAI o3-mini model is a significant improvement over the o1-mini, reaching o1 performance levels. While generally good, its performance isn't universally better than previous models (o1, o1-prev.) or GPT-4o across all benchmarks. This means workflows should be re-evaluated with each model upgrade.
The o3-mini has "low," "medium," and "high" versions, with "low" being the base model used for benchmarking. It's speculated that the higher versions simply involve more processing. A fair comparison with other models like Gemini 2.0 Thinking or DeepSeek-R1 would likely need to use the "low" version and a similar "think more" mechanism.
The system card is recommended reading due to its comprehensive benchmark data.
https://openai.com/index/openai-o3-mini/
wyu1
authored
a
paper
5 months ago
Post
2036
Simple summary on DeepSeek AI's Janus-Pro: A fresh take on multimodal AI!
It builds on its predecessor, Janus, by tweaking the training methodology rather than the model architecture. The result? Improved performance in understanding and generating multimodal data.
Janus-Pro uses a three-stage training strategy, similar to Janus, but with key modifications:
✦ Stage 1 & 2: Focus on separate training for specific objectives, rather than mixing data.
✦ Stage 3: Fine-tuning with a careful balance of multimodal data.
Benchmarks show Janus-Pro holds its own against specialized models like TokenFlow XL and MetaMorph, and other multimodal models like SD3 Medium and DALL-E 3.
The main limitation? Low image resolution (384x384). However, this seems like a strategic choice to focus on establishing a solid "recipe" for multimodal models. Future work will likely leverage this recipe and increased computing power to achieve higher resolutions.
It builds on its predecessor, Janus, by tweaking the training methodology rather than the model architecture. The result? Improved performance in understanding and generating multimodal data.
Janus-Pro uses a three-stage training strategy, similar to Janus, but with key modifications:
✦ Stage 1 & 2: Focus on separate training for specific objectives, rather than mixing data.
✦ Stage 3: Fine-tuning with a careful balance of multimodal data.
Benchmarks show Janus-Pro holds its own against specialized models like TokenFlow XL and MetaMorph, and other multimodal models like SD3 Medium and DALL-E 3.
The main limitation? Low image resolution (384x384). However, this seems like a strategic choice to focus on establishing a solid "recipe" for multimodal models. Future work will likely leverage this recipe and increased computing power to achieve higher resolutions.
Post
1742
New look for AI powered paper reviews from the list by Hugging Face Daily Papers ( managed by the
@akhaliq
)
Bookmark the webpage along, check comprehensive reviews by Google DeepMind Gemini 1.5, and listen to audio podcast made by the same tech used in NotebookLM.
Link: https://deep-diver.github.io/ai-paper-reviewer/
This is not an official service by Hugging Face. It is just a service developed by an individual developer using his own money :)
Bookmark the webpage along, check comprehensive reviews by Google DeepMind Gemini 1.5, and listen to audio podcast made by the same tech used in NotebookLM.
Link: https://deep-diver.github.io/ai-paper-reviewer/
This is not an official service by Hugging Face. It is just a service developed by an individual developer using his own money :)
Post
2046
Simple summarization of Evolving Deeper LLM Thinking (Google DeepMind)
The process starts by posing a question.
1) The LLM generates initial responses.
2) These generated responses are evaluated according to specific criteria (program-based checker).
3) The LLM critiques the evaluated results.
4) The LLM refines the responses based on the evaluation, critique, and original responses.
The refined response is then fed back into step 2). If it meets the criteria, the process ends. Otherwise, the algorithm generates more responses based on the refined ones (with some being discarded, some remaining, and some responses potentially being merged).
Through this process, it demonstrated excellent performance in complex scheduling problems (travel planning, meeting scheduling, etc.). It's a viable method for finding highly effective solutions in specific scenarios.
However, there are two major drawbacks:
🤔 An excessive number of API calls are required. (While the cost might not be very high, it leads to significant latency.)
🤔 The evaluator is program-based. (This limits its use as a general method. It could potentially be modified/implemented using LLM as Judge, but that would introduce additional API costs for evaluation.)
https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.09891
The process starts by posing a question.
1) The LLM generates initial responses.
2) These generated responses are evaluated according to specific criteria (program-based checker).
3) The LLM critiques the evaluated results.
4) The LLM refines the responses based on the evaluation, critique, and original responses.
The refined response is then fed back into step 2). If it meets the criteria, the process ends. Otherwise, the algorithm generates more responses based on the refined ones (with some being discarded, some remaining, and some responses potentially being merged).
Through this process, it demonstrated excellent performance in complex scheduling problems (travel planning, meeting scheduling, etc.). It's a viable method for finding highly effective solutions in specific scenarios.
However, there are two major drawbacks:
🤔 An excessive number of API calls are required. (While the cost might not be very high, it leads to significant latency.)
🤔 The evaluator is program-based. (This limits its use as a general method. It could potentially be modified/implemented using LLM as Judge, but that would introduce additional API costs for evaluation.)
https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.09891
Post
2091
Simple Summarization on DeepSeek-R1 from DeepSeek AI
The RL stage is very important.
↳ However, it is difficult to create a truly helpful AI for people solely through RL.
↳ So, we applied a learning pipeline consisting of four stages: providing a good starting point, reasoning RL, SFT, and safety RL, and achieved performance comparable to o1.
↳ Simply fine-tuning other open models with the data generated by R1-Zero (distillation) resulted in performance comparable to o1-mini.
Of course, this is just a brief overview and may not be of much help. All models are accessible on Hugging Face, and the paper can be read through the GitHub repository.
Model:
deepseek-ai
Paper: https://github.com/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1
The RL stage is very important.
↳ However, it is difficult to create a truly helpful AI for people solely through RL.
↳ So, we applied a learning pipeline consisting of four stages: providing a good starting point, reasoning RL, SFT, and safety RL, and achieved performance comparable to o1.
↳ Simply fine-tuning other open models with the data generated by R1-Zero (distillation) resulted in performance comparable to o1-mini.
Of course, this is just a brief overview and may not be of much help. All models are accessible on Hugging Face, and the paper can be read through the GitHub repository.
Model:
deepseek-ai
Paper: https://github.com/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1
- 1 reply
chansung
authored
a
paper
7 months ago
SaylorTwift
posted
an
update
7 months ago
Post
795
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.
https://github.com/argilla-io/argilla-cookbook/blob/main/domain-eval/README.md
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.
https://github.com/argilla-io/argilla-cookbook/blob/main/domain-eval/README.md
Post
1985
🎙️ Listen to the audio "Podcast" of every single Hugging Face Daily Papers.
Now, "AI Paper Reviewer" project can automatically generates audio podcasts on any papers published on arXiv, and this is integrated into the GitHub Action pipeline. I sounds pretty similar to hashtag#NotebookLM in my opinion.
🎙️ Try out yourself at https://deep-diver.github.io/ai-paper-reviewer/
This audio podcast is powered by Google technologies: 1) Google DeepMind Gemini 1.5 Flash model to generate scripts of a podcast, then 2) Google Cloud Vertex AI's Text to Speech model to synthesize the voice turning the scripts into the natural sounding voices (with latest addition of "Journey" voice style)
"AI Paper Reviewer" is also an open source project. Anyone can use it to build and own a personal blog on any papers of your interests. Hence, checkout the project repository below if you are interested in!
: https://github.com/deep-diver/paper-reviewer
This project is going to support other models including open weights soon for both text-based content generation and voice synthesis for the podcast. The only reason I chose Gemini model is that it offers a "free-tier" which is enough to shape up this projects with non-realtime batch generations. I'm excited to see how others will use this tool to explore the world of AI research, hence feel free to share your feedback and suggestions!
Now, "AI Paper Reviewer" project can automatically generates audio podcasts on any papers published on arXiv, and this is integrated into the GitHub Action pipeline. I sounds pretty similar to hashtag#NotebookLM in my opinion.
🎙️ Try out yourself at https://deep-diver.github.io/ai-paper-reviewer/
This audio podcast is powered by Google technologies: 1) Google DeepMind Gemini 1.5 Flash model to generate scripts of a podcast, then 2) Google Cloud Vertex AI's Text to Speech model to synthesize the voice turning the scripts into the natural sounding voices (with latest addition of "Journey" voice style)
"AI Paper Reviewer" is also an open source project. Anyone can use it to build and own a personal blog on any papers of your interests. Hence, checkout the project repository below if you are interested in!
: https://github.com/deep-diver/paper-reviewer
This project is going to support other models including open weights soon for both text-based content generation and voice synthesis for the podcast. The only reason I chose Gemini model is that it offers a "free-tier" which is enough to shape up this projects with non-realtime batch generations. I'm excited to see how others will use this tool to explore the world of AI research, hence feel free to share your feedback and suggestions!
- 3 replies
Post
4763
Effortlessly stay up-to-date with AI research trends using a new AI tool, "AI Paper Reviewer" !!
It analyzes a list of Hugging Face Daily Papers(w/ @akhaliq ) and turn them into insightful blog posts. This project leverages Gemini models (1.5 Pro, 1.5 Flash, and 1.5 Flash-8B) for content generation and Upstage Document Parse for parsing the layout and contents.
blog link: https://deep-diver.github.io/ai-paper-reviewer/
Also, here is the link of GitHub repository for parsing and generating pipeline. By using this, you can easily build your own GitHub static pages based on any arXiv papers with your own interest!
: https://github.com/deep-diver/paper-reviewer
It analyzes a list of Hugging Face Daily Papers(w/ @akhaliq ) and turn them into insightful blog posts. This project leverages Gemini models (1.5 Pro, 1.5 Flash, and 1.5 Flash-8B) for content generation and Upstage Document Parse for parsing the layout and contents.
blog link: https://deep-diver.github.io/ai-paper-reviewer/
Also, here is the link of GitHub repository for parsing and generating pipeline. By using this, you can easily build your own GitHub static pages based on any arXiv papers with your own interest!
: https://github.com/deep-diver/paper-reviewer
wyu1
authored
a
paper
8 months ago
Sterzhang
authored
a
paper
9 months ago