Update README.md
Browse files
README.md
CHANGED
@@ -6,4 +6,38 @@ inference:
|
|
6 |
function_to_apply: "none"
|
7 |
widget:
|
8 |
- text: "I cuddled with my dog today."
|
9 |
-
---
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
function_to_apply: "none"
|
7 |
widget:
|
8 |
- text: "I cuddled with my dog today."
|
9 |
+
---
|
10 |
+
|
11 |
+
# Utilitarian Deberta 01
|
12 |
+
|
13 |
+
## Model description
|
14 |
+
|
15 |
+
This is a [Deberta model](https://huggingface.co/microsoft/deberta-v3-large) fine-tuned on for computing utility estimates of experiences, represented in first-person sentences. It was trained from human-annotated pairwise utility comparisons, from the [ETHICS dataset](https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.02275).
|
16 |
+
|
17 |
+
## Intended use
|
18 |
+
|
19 |
+
The main use case is the computation of utility estimates of first-person text scenarios.
|
20 |
+
|
21 |
+
## Limitations
|
22 |
+
|
23 |
+
The model was only trained on a limited number of scenarios, and only on first-person sentences. It does not have the capability of interpreting highly complex or unusual scenarios, and it does not have hard guarantees on its domain of accuracy.
|
24 |
+
|
25 |
+
## How to use
|
26 |
+
|
27 |
+
The model receives a sentence describing a scenario in first-person, and outputs a scalar representing a utility estimate.
|
28 |
+
|
29 |
+
## Training data
|
30 |
+
|
31 |
+
The training data is the train split from the Utilitarianism part of the [ETHICS dataset](https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.02275).
|
32 |
+
|
33 |
+
## Training procedure
|
34 |
+
|
35 |
+
Training can be reproduced by executing the training procedure from [`tune.py`](https://github.com/hendrycks/ethics/blob/3e4c09259a1b4022607da093e9452383fc1bb7e3/utilitarianism/tune.py) as follows:
|
36 |
+
|
37 |
+
```
|
38 |
+
python tune.py --ngpus 1 --model microsoft/deberta-v3-large --learning_rate 1e-5 --batch_size 16 --nepochs 2
|
39 |
+
```
|
40 |
+
|
41 |
+
## Evaluation results
|
42 |
+
|
43 |
+
The model achieves 92.2% accuracy on [The Moral Uncertainty Research Competition](https://moraluncertainty.mlsafety.org/), which consists of a subset of the ETHICS dataset.
|