Difference between revisions of "Benchmarks"
m (→General Language Understanding Evaluation (GLUE)) |
m (→The Stanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD)) |
||
| Line 86: | Line 86: | ||
== <span id="SQuAD"></span>The Stanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD) == | == <span id="SQuAD"></span>The Stanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD) == | ||
| − | * [http://rajpurkar.github.io/SQuAD-explorer/ The Stanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD)] | + | * [http://rajpurkar.github.io/SQuAD-explorer/ The Stanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD)] |
| + | |||
| + | {|<!-- T --> | ||
| + | | valign="top" | | ||
| + | {| class="wikitable" style="width: 550px;" | ||
| + | || | ||
| + | <youtube>l8ZYCvgGu0o</youtube> | ||
| + | <b>Applying BERT to Question Answering (SQuAD v1.1) | ||
| + | </b><br>In this video I’ll explain the details of how BERT is used to perform “Question Answering”--specifically, how it’s applied to SQuAD v1.1 (Stanford Question Answering Dataset). I’ll also walk us through the following notebook, where we’ll take a model that’s already been fine-tuned on SQuAD, and apply it to our own questions and text. | ||
| + | |} | ||
| + | |<!-- M --> | ||
| + | | valign="top" | | ||
| + | {| class="wikitable" style="width: 550px;" | ||
| + | || | ||
| + | <youtube>JrnlQ7uHd6s</youtube> | ||
| + | <b>Question and Answering System for the SQuAD Dataset | ||
| + | </b><br>CS224N default final project presentation | ||
| + | |} | ||
| + | |}<!-- B --> | ||
== <span id="RACE"></span>ReAding Comprehension (RACE) == | == <span id="RACE"></span>ReAding Comprehension (RACE) == | ||
Revision as of 13:41, 7 September 2020
YouTube search... ...Google search
- Evaluation
- Datasets
- Case Studies
- Machine Learning Benchmarks and AI Self-Driving Cars | Lance Eliot - AItrends
- Benchmarking simple models with feature extraction against modern black-box methods | Martin Dittgen - Towards Data Science
- DAWNBench | Stanford - an End-to-End Deep Learning Benchmark and Competition
- Benchmarking 20 Machine Learning Models Accuracy and Speed | Marc Borowczak - Data Science Central
- Benchmarking deep learning models on large healthcare datasets | S. Purushotham, C. Meng, Z. Chea, and Y. Liu
|
|
|
|
Contents
General Language Understanding Evaluation (GLUE)
The General Language Understanding Evaluation (GLUE) benchmark is a collection of resources for training, evaluating, and analyzing natural language understanding systems... like picking out the names of people and organizations in a sentence and figuring out what a pronoun like “it” refers to when there are multiple potential antecedents. GLUE consists of: A benchmark of nine sentence- or sentence-pair language understanding tasks built on established existing datasets and selected to cover a diverse range of dataset sizes, text genres, and degrees of difficulty, A diagnostic dataset designed to evaluate and analyze model performance with respect to a wide range of linguistic phenomena found in natural language, and A public leaderboard for tracking performance on the benchmark and a dashboard for visualizing the performance of models on the diagnostic set.
|
The Stanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD)
|
|
ReAding Comprehension (RACE)
MLPerf
- MLPerf benchmarks for measuring training and inference performance of ML hardware, software, and services.
Procgen
- OpenAI
- OpenAI’s Procgen Benchmark prevents AI model overfitting | Kyle Wiggers - VentureBeat a set of 16 procedurally generated environments that measure how quickly a model learns generalizable skills. It builds atop the startup’s CoinRun toolset, which used procedural generation to construct sets of training and test levels.
OpenAI previously released Neural MMO, a “massively multiagent” virtual training ground that plops agents in the middle of an RPG-like world, and Gym, a proving ground for algorithms for reinforcement learning (which involves training machines to do things based on trial and error). More recently, it made available SafetyGym, a suite of tools for developing AI that respects safety constraints while training, and for comparing the “safety” of algorithms and the extent to which those algorithms avoid mistakes while learning.