Repository navigation
Semi-Feature: Allow alternate backends for recursive LMs (at least for depth=1) - #44
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In our blogpost and original code, we made it pretty easy to specify alternative models for different parts of the RLMs. In the interest of minimizing technical debt and making this work as intended, in this codebase we stripped this feature and made
other_backendsa WIP.This PR is just a quick fix to allow people to re-produce the blogpost experiments at the very least. I will likely re-work a lot of this in the future depending on how I want it to look, but for now it should just allow one additional backend (in the future should be any amount).