Optimize MLLM ambiguity calculation #825
Draft
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #825 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.63% 99.63%
=======================================
Files 95 95
Lines 7171 7182 +11
=======================================
+ Hits 7145 7156 +11
Misses 26 26 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR is an attempt to optimize the calculation of the ambiguity feature in MLLM. In cases of extremely many matches, the ambiguity calculation can take a long time, as reported by @RietdorfC in #822.
This PR changes the calculation so that it will first group together TokenSets with the same tokens; for example, all concepts with the same (or very similar) label can be considered together instead of calculating ambiguity for each of them separately. Due to the quadratic nature of the ambiguity calculation (it's O(N^2) where N is the number of matches found in a piece of text), reducing N by grouping TokenSets may reduce the amount of necessary comparisons quite drastically.
I'm leaving this as a draft PR because this needs to be tested further. I'm not yet 100% sure that the calculation result matches the original.
Closes #822