File size: 8,254 Bytes
ffe845b d3f3295 4c621eb 3c4ac31 85e3e97 73ffa45 8836ca8 ffe845b b7afbcf ffe845b 026c9ee ffe845b 026c9ee ffe845b e96d022 ec2367d ffe845b 9be11d9 ffe845b 3448a66 73ffa45 3448a66 ffe845b e0a0bf0 1e26bdc fa9794f ffe845b 613406c e96d022 ffe845b 613406c ffe845b 61f411e ee8ea4c ffe845b 613406c b03b089 30d0038 b03b089 613406c fa9794f 613406c fa9794f 30d0038 fa9794f 30d0038 fa9794f 613406c |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 |
---
license: other
license_name: apache-2.0-or-mnpl-0.1
license_link: https://mistral.ai/licences/MNPL-0.1.md
tags:
- code
- generation
- debugging
- editing
pipeline_tag: text-generation
---
# Code Logic Debugger v0.1
Hardware requirements for ChatGPT GPT-4o level inference speed for the models in this repo: >=24 GB VRAM.
Note: The following results are based on my day-to-day workflows only on an RTX 3090. My goal was to run private models that could beat GPT-4o and Claude-3.5 in code debugging and generation to ‘load balance’ between OpenAI/Anthropic’s free plan and local models to avoid hitting rate limits, and to upload as few lines of my code and ideas to their servers as possible.
An example of a complex debugging scenario is where you build library A on top of library B that requires library C as a dependency but the root cause was a variable in library C. In this case, the following workflow guided me to correctly identify the problem.
<br>
## Throughput

IQ here refers to Importance Matrix Quantization. For performance comparison against regular GGUF, please read [this Reddit post](https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1993iro/ggufs_quants_can_punch_above_their_weights_now/). For more info on the techique, please see [this GitHub discussion](https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp/discussions/5006/).
<br>
## Personal Preference Ranking
Evaluated on two programming tasks: debugging and generation. It may be a bit subjective. `DeepSeekV2 Coder Instruct` is ranked lower because DeepSeek's Privacy Policy says that they may collect "text input, prompt" and there's no way around it.
Code debugging/editing prompt template used:
```
<code>
<current output>
<the problem description of the current output>
<expected output (in English is fine)>
<any hints>
Think step by step. Solve this problem without removing any existing functionalities, logic, or checks, except any incorrect code that interferes with your edits.
```
| **Rank** | **Model Name** | **Token Speed (tokens/s)** | **Debugging Performance** | **Code Generation Performance** | **Notes** |
|----------|----------------------------------------------|----------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1* | codestral-22b-v0.1-IQ6_K.gguf (this repo) | 34.21 | Excellent at complex debugging, often surpasses GPT-4o and Claude-3.5 | Good, but may not be par with GPT-4o | One of the best overall for debugging in my workflow, use Balanced Mode. |
| 1* | Claude-3.5-Sonnet | N/A | Poor in complex debugging compared to Codestral | Excellent, better in design and more creative than GPT-4o in code generation | Great for code generation, but weaker in debugging. |
| 1* | GPT-4o | N/A | Good at complex debugging but can be outperformed by Codestral | Excellent, generally reliable for code generation, more knowledgable | Balanced performance between code debugging and generation. |
| 4 | DeepSeekV2 Coder Instruct | N/A | Good, but outputs the same code in complex scenarios | Excellent at general code generation, rivals GPT-4o | Excellent at code generation, but has data privacy concerns as per Privacy Policy. |
| 5* | Qwen2-7b-Instruct bf16 | 78.22 | Average, can think of correct approaches | Sometimes helps generate new ideas | High speed, useful for generating ideas. |
| 5* | AutoCoder.IQ4_K.gguf (this repo) | 26.43 | Excellent at solutions that require one to few lines of edits | Generates useful short code segments | Try Precise Mode or Balanced Mode. |
| 7 | GPT-4o-mini | N/A | Decent, but struggles with complex debugging tasks | Reliable for shorter or simpler code generation tasks | Suitable for less complex coding tasks. |
| 8 | Meta-Llama-3.1-70B-Instruct-IQ2_XS.gguf | 2.55 | Poor, occasionally helps generate ideas | --- | Speed is a significant limitation. |
| 9 | Trinity-2-Codestral-22B-Q6_K_L | N/A | Poor, similar issues to DeepSeekV2 in outputing the same code | --- | Similar problem to DeepSeekV2, not recommended for my complex tasks. |
| 10 | DeepSeekV2 Coder Lite Instruct Q_8L | N/A | Poor, repeats code similar to other models in its family | Not as effective in my context | Not recommended overall based on my criteria. |
<br>
## Generation Kwargs
Balanced Mode:
```python
generation_kwargs = {
"max_tokens":8192,
"stop":["<|EOT|>", "</s>", "<|end▁of▁sentence|>", "<eos>", "<|start_header_id|>", "<|end_header_id|>", "<|eot_id|>"],
"temperature":0.7,
"stream":True,
"top_k":50,
"top_p":0.95,
}
```
Precise Mode:
```python
generation_kwargs = {
"max_tokens":8192,
"stop":["<|EOT|>", "</s>", "<|end▁of▁sentence|>", "<eos>", "<|start_header_id|>", "<|end_header_id|>", "<|eot_id|>"],
"temperature":0.0,
"stream":True,
"top_p":1.0,
}
```
Qwen2 7B:
```python
generation_kwargs = {
"max_tokens":8192,
"stop":["<|EOT|>", "</s>", "<|end▁of▁sentence|>", "<eos>", "<|start_header_id|>", "<|end_header_id|>", "<|eot_id|>"],
"temperature":0.4,
"stream":True,
"top_k":20,
"top_p":0.8,
}
```
Other variations in temperature, top_k, and top_p were tested 5-8 times per model too, but I'm sticking to the above three.
<br>
## New Discoveries
The following are tested in my workflow, but may not generalize well to other workflows.
- In general, if there's an error in the code, copy pasting the last few rows of stacktrace (without the library stacktrace) to the LLM seems to work.
- Adding "Reflect." after a failed attempt at code generation sometimes allows Claude-3.5-Sonnet to generate the correct version.
- If GPT-4o reasons correctly in its first response and the conversation is then continued with GPT-4-mini, the mini model can maintain comparable level of reasoning/accuracy as GPT-4o.
<br>
## License
A reminder that `codestral-22b-v0.1-IQ6_K.gguf` should only be used for non-commercial projects.
Please use `Qwen2-7b-Instruct bf16` and `AutoCoder.IQ4_K.gguf` as alternatives for commericial activities.
<br>
## Download
```
pip install -U "huggingface_hub[cli]"
```
Commercial use:
```
huggingface-cli download FredZhang7/claudegpt-code-logic-debugger-v0.1 --include "AutoCoder.IQ4_K.gguf" --local-dir ./
```
Non-commercial (e.g. testing, research, personal, or evaluation purposes) use:
```
huggingface-cli download FredZhang7/claudegpt-code-logic-debugger-v0.1 --include "codestral-22b-v0.1-IQ6_K.gguf" --local-dir ./
``` |