BOTS reference evaluation results collection#440
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @ShenQianli, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request enhances the BOTS framework by adding an optional feature for collecting and integrating reference model evaluation results. It provides a structured way to evaluate a specified reference model against a dataset, log the performance metrics, and then merge these metrics back into the original dataset as a new feature. This allows for more comprehensive analysis and utilization of reference model performance within the BOTS ecosystem. Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces a new workflow and script for collecting reference evaluation results and integrating them into existing datasets. It also includes updates to the documentation and data path configurations in bots.yaml and random.yaml. The changes are generally well-structured, but I've identified a critical bug in the new Python script that overrides a command-line argument, a misleading log message, and some maintainability improvements regarding import statements in the new workflow class.
Description
As the title says.
Checklist
Please check the following items before code is ready to be reviewed.