-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.7k
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
Models without Vocabulary #5798
Conversation
Do you have a more specific example of a use case for this feature - e.g., a model with a vocab type not currently supported by llama.cpp, but with weights that are? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This seems something that can be useful
@cebtenzzre right now we're using some kind of this tokenizer with the llama model trained by our ml engineers. And in our system the vocab is on the client side, and the server only processes tokens. So there is no need for the vocab to be included in the model. |
735c684
to
2580fe5
Compare
2580fe5
to
e0504d5
Compare
* additional methods to read model and ctx parameters * vocab size as a part of a model metadata * models without vocabulary, convert.py part * models without vocabulary, llama.cpp part * PR clean up * converter scrypt fixes * llama_vocab_type update (renamed the new key) * pr review fixes * revert function renaming * one more NoVocab assert
* additional methods to read model and ctx parameters * vocab size as a part of a model metadata * models without vocabulary, convert.py part * models without vocabulary, llama.cpp part * PR clean up * converter scrypt fixes * llama_vocab_type update (renamed the new key) * pr review fixes * revert function renaming * one more NoVocab assert
I made some changes to the model converter so that it could create a gguf model without a built-in dictionary.
This will allow to use any custom external dictionary in an application built with llama.cpp.