Update README.md
Browse files
README.md
CHANGED
@@ -25,4 +25,48 @@ configs:
|
|
25 |
path: data/train-*
|
26 |
- split: test
|
27 |
path: data/test-*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28 |
---
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
path: data/train-*
|
26 |
- split: test
|
27 |
path: data/test-*
|
28 |
+
license: apache-2.0
|
29 |
+
task_categories:
|
30 |
+
- summarization
|
31 |
+
tags:
|
32 |
+
- code
|
33 |
+
size_categories:
|
34 |
+
- n<1K
|
35 |
---
|
36 |
+
|
37 |
+
# Generate README Eval
|
38 |
+
|
39 |
+
The generate-readme-eval is a dataset (train split) and benchmark (test split) to evaluate the effectiveness of LLMs
|
40 |
+
when summarizing entire GitHub repos in form of a README.md file. The datset is curated from top 400 real Python repositories
|
41 |
+
from GitHub with at least 1000 stars and 100 forks. The script used to generate the dataset can be found [here](_script_for_gen.py).
|
42 |
+
For the dataset we restrict ourselves to GH repositories that are less than 100k tokens in size to allow us to put the entire repo
|
43 |
+
in the context of LLM in a single call. The `train` split of the dataset can be used to fine-tune your own model, the results
|
44 |
+
reported here are for the `test` split.
|
45 |
+
|
46 |
+
To evaluate a LLM on the benchmark we can use the evaluation script given [here](_script_for_eval.py). During evaluation we prompt
|
47 |
+
the LLM to generate a structured README.md file using the entire contents of the repository (`repo_content`). We evaluate the output
|
48 |
+
response from LLM by comparing it with the actual README file of that repository across several different metrics.
|
49 |
+
|
50 |
+
In addition to the traditional NLP metircs like BLEU, ROUGE scores and cosine similarity, we also compute custom metrics
|
51 |
+
that capture structural similarity, code consistency, readbility and information retrieval (from code to README). The final score
|
52 |
+
is generated between by taking a weighted average of the metrics. The weights used for the final score are shown below.
|
53 |
+
|
54 |
+
```
|
55 |
+
weights = {
|
56 |
+
'bleu': 0.1,
|
57 |
+
'rouge-1': 0.033,
|
58 |
+
'rouge-2': 0.033,
|
59 |
+
'rouge-l': 0.034,
|
60 |
+
'cosine_similarity': 0.1,
|
61 |
+
'structural_similarity': 0.1,
|
62 |
+
'information_retrieval': 0.2,
|
63 |
+
'code_consistency': 0.2,
|
64 |
+
'readability': 0.2
|
65 |
+
}
|
66 |
+
```
|
67 |
+
|
68 |
+
At the end of evaluation the script will print the metrics and store the entire run in a log file. If you want to add your model to the
|
69 |
+
leaderboard please create a PR with the log file of the run and details about the model.
|
70 |
+
|
71 |
+
# Leaderboard
|
72 |
+
|