Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Added error check to RLOO, PPOv2, OnlineDPO that ref_policy and policy have different identities #2057

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Sep 17, 2024

Conversation

RylanSchaeffer
Copy link
Contributor

As discussed in Issue 2046, we add an error check to make sure that the ref_policy and policy have different identities.

This is just a quick and dirty demonstration to show what I have in mind. Feedback is very welcome!

@RylanSchaeffer
Copy link
Contributor Author

As a quick reminder, is is a way of checking whether two Python objects have the same identity: https://stackoverflow.com/a/3647560/4570472

x = [1, 2, 3]
y = x
z = [1, 2, 3]
y == x  # True
y is x    # True
z == x  # True
z is x  # False

Copy link
Member

@lewtun lewtun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks a lot for adding this sanity check @RylanSchaeffer ! If I understand correctly, this scenario can occur for any trainer where there is a reference model - would you like to expand your check to the other trainers as well?

trl/trainer/online_dpo_trainer.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@HuggingFaceDocBuilderDev

The docs for this PR live here. All of your documentation changes will be reflected on that endpoint. The docs are available until 30 days after the last update.

@qgallouedec
Copy link
Member

Useful check, thanks!

Co-authored-by: lewtun <lewis.c.tunstall@gmail.com>
@qgallouedec qgallouedec mentioned this pull request Sep 16, 2024
@qgallouedec
Copy link
Member

Failing test not related to this PR

@qgallouedec qgallouedec merged commit e74dbf2 into huggingface:main Sep 17, 2024
2 of 9 checks passed
@qgallouedec
Copy link
Member

Thanks @RylanSchaeffer!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants