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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

add CLIP-ViT-L-scope #1022

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

add CLIP-ViT-L-scope #1022

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
bc2619f
add CLIP-ViT-L-scope
Lewington-pitsos Nov 12, 2024
37993bf
make names more consistent, point to usable repo
Lewington-pitsos Nov 14, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
7 changes: 7 additions & 0 deletions packages/tasks/src/model-libraries.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -212,6 +212,13 @@ export const MODEL_LIBRARIES_UI_ELEMENTS = {
repoUrl: "https://github.com/cartesia-ai/cartesia_mlx",
snippets: snippets.cartesia_mlx,
},
"clip-vit-l-scope": {
prettyLabel: "CLIP-ViT-L-scope",
repoName: "CLIP-ViT-L-scope",
Comment on lines +215 to +217
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
"clip-vit-l-scope": {
prettyLabel: "CLIP-ViT-L-scope",
repoName: "CLIP-ViT-L-scope",
"clipscope": {
prettyLabel: "clipscope",
repoName: "clipscope",

Given the library is https://github.com/Lewington-pitsos/clipscope, I'd recommend to tag the model as "clipscope" instead.

repoUrl: "https://github.com/Lewington-pitsos/clipscope",
filter: false,
countDownloads: `path_extension:"pt"`,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

By doing so, any download of any pt file in the model will count as a new download. This means that if a user downloads the full repo, we will count it as X downloads (~80?). It's ok to do so if you think users will only download files one by one depending on their use case.

Another problem is that all downloads are tracked as 1 metric and you won't be able to know if users are more interested by a layer or another. A solution for this would be to create N models on the Hub (1 per layer for instance) and then create a Collection so group them all. For example you can find all models related to the Gemma scope release in this collection: https://huggingface.co/collections/google/gemma-scope-release-66a4271f6f0b4d4a9d5e04e2. A benefit of having a collection of models is that downloads will be tracked for each model individually, giving you more insights on the usage of your library.

If you worry about the cost of maintaining all these repos, I'd recommend automating the upload and consistency between model cards using a script based on huggingface_hub. Let me know what you think :)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In terms of tracking, these models are all derived from the same training process and a common use case for them should be to compare how they perform against one another. In a sense collectively they comprise a single tool. https://huggingface.co/google/gemma-scope-2b-pt-res from which we took inspiration takes a similar approach and places large numbers of related models together as a single "model".

Makes sense to keep countDownloads: path_extension:"pt", in that case!

},
cotracker: {
prettyLabel: "CoTracker",
repoName: "CoTracker",
Expand Down
Loading