They have more fully open stuff in the pipeline. IMHO it's good that they put out stuff for hobbyists to play around with so that they're not immediately overtaken by people ready to deploy things at commercial scale.
> Hardware: StableLM Zephyr 3B was trained on the Stability AI cluster across 8 nodes with 8 A100 80GBs GPUs for each nodes.
I might be missing it but do they say the number of training tokens that was used to train this?
This would help with efforts like TinyLlama in trying to figure out how well the scaling works with training tokens vs parameter size and challenging the chinchilla model.
How those licenses work for generated content?
If it's non-commercial does it mean I can still use it for work to generate stuff?
In other words - is it similar to ie. using GIMP, which is open source, but I can still use created content in commercial product without attribution?
Yeah, I think this is a great release, but I also suspect that most people won't end up using it just because of the license. It's actually a lot more restrictive than what I would personally consider "commercial" usage:
> Non-Commercial Uses does not include any production use of the Software Products or any Derivative Works.
So even if you want to launch a free service using this, that's not allowed.
Not really. They already chose to show the benchmark where it does best and even then it’s still quite a bit worse (though definitely impressive for its size).
If you take a look at other benchmarks, for example MMLU@5-shot then this does 46.3, while gpt-3.5 does 70.
But there might be some use cases where this one is close enough in performance and the difference in cost and speed make it a better choice.
By comparing on benchmarks that are either limited, or have data leaks, or in most cases just don't make sense in terms of usability - I've personally stopped looking at benchmarks to compare models. Personally, if I want to try a new model I hear a lot of chatter about, I use it for a few hours in my daily workflow. My baseline is GPT3.5 and GPT4, and I compare the models with them in terms of my day to day usage.
The LLM field is still messy at large, if you look at the rankings of model performance, they still do not reflect their usability in real life. I think one major challenge is to find a corresponding benchmark.
simonw|2 years ago
I'm very interested in high quality 3B models, but it's hard to get excited about this given the increasing array of commercially usable models.
anigbrowl|2 years ago
emadm|2 years ago
unknown|2 years ago
[deleted]
brianjking|2 years ago
supermatt|2 years ago
“Zephyr” is MIT, but “Stability Zephyr” is non commercial. They could have at least used a different name.
“Inspired” in all but license it would seem
filterfiber|2 years ago
I might be missing it but do they say the number of training tokens that was used to train this?
This would help with efforts like TinyLlama in trying to figure out how well the scaling works with training tokens vs parameter size and challenging the chinchilla model.
emadm|2 years ago
https://stability.wandb.io/stability-llm/stable-lm/reports/S...
mirekrusin|2 years ago
josh-sematic|2 years ago
Reubend|2 years ago
> Non-Commercial Uses does not include any production use of the Software Products or any Derivative Works.
So even if you want to launch a free service using this, that's not allowed.
stavros|2 years ago
Version467|2 years ago
But there might be some use cases where this one is close enough in performance and the difference in cost and speed make it a better choice.
filterfiber|2 years ago
Zephyr-7B-B still beats it in most benchmarks but it's close.
This model is almost Zephyr-7B-B performance at 3B size which is a lot better for inference requirements.
alsodumb|2 years ago
3abiton|2 years ago
adamkochanowicz|2 years ago
haltist|2 years ago
nextworddev|2 years ago
simlevesque|2 years ago
pulse7|2 years ago
unknown|2 years ago
[deleted]
m3kw9|2 years ago
simonw|2 years ago
https://huggingface.co/TheBloke?search_models=Zephyr doesn't have a GGML for it yet but I wouldn't be surprised to see one by the end of the day.