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.

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

minor version update + major edits #6

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jan 8, 2025
Merged

minor version update + major edits #6

merged 9 commits into from
Jan 8, 2025

Conversation

frgmt0
Copy link
Contributor

@frgmt0 frgmt0 commented Jan 6, 2025

added:

  • beamWidth control to the tool input schema (beam_search)
  • numSimulations control to the tool input schema (mcts)

frgmt0 and others added 6 commits January 6, 2025 10:34
I added some tests and more a "bloggy" approach to explaining how the reasoning works under the hood I guess?
added current version, so we can do "what changed" if needed
@Jacck
Copy link
Owner

Jacck commented Jan 7, 2025

I've found a potential issue while testing: the numSimulations parameter is accepted but the MCTS strategy doesn't seem to reflect the changed value in its metrics (still shows default 50 simulations). Could you check if the simulation count is actually being applied in the MCTS implementation?

Otherwise the implementation looks clean with good input validation.

Regarding benchmark, lets have a talk, I share my email: [email protected]

@frgmt0
Copy link
Contributor Author

frgmt0 commented Jan 7, 2025

That is definitely weird. I checked right now and here is the input output:

Default settings:

{
  `thought`: `Testing MCTS with default simulations`,
  `strategyType`: `mcts`,
  `thoughtNumber`: 1,
  `totalThoughts`: 3,
  `nextThoughtNeeded`: true
}
{"thoughtNumber":1,"totalThoughts":3,"nextThoughtNeeded":true,"thought":"Testing MCTS with default simulations","nodeId":"660b90de-bd83-46f0-9203-a810f0f5fd99","score":0.395,"strategyUsed":"mcts","stats":{"totalNodes":138,"averageScore":0.4418236714975843,"maxDepth":5,"branchingFactor":0.5434782608695652,"strategyMetrics":{"beam_search":{"name":"BeamSearchStrategy","nodesExplored":138,"averageScore":0.4418236714975843,"maxDepth":5,"beamWidth":3,"activeBeams":2,"totalBeamNodes":3},"mcts":{"name":"MonteCarloTreeSearchStrategy","nodesExplored":138,"averageScore":0.4418236714975843,"maxDepth":5,"simulationDepth":5,"numSimulations":50,"explorationConstant":1.4142135623730951,"totalSimulations":**51**,"active":true}}}}

I believe the default is 50 but im not sure why it lands on 51 unless the initial thought/start of the reasoning chain counts as one, which I think is the case

With 100:

{
  `thought`: `Testing MCTS with 100 simulations`,
  `strategyType`: `mcts`,
  `thoughtNumber`: 1,
  `totalThoughts`: 3,
  `numSimulations`: 100,
  `nextThoughtNeeded`: true
}
{"thoughtNumber":1,"totalThoughts":3,"nextThoughtNeeded":true,"thought":"Testing MCTS with 100 simulations","nodeId":"eec37abc-d605-4a9c-9aeb-844123e7b027","score":0.38833333333333336,"strategyUsed":"mcts","stats":{"totalNodes":144,"averageScore":0.4404861111111108,"maxDepth":5,"branchingFactor":0.5555555555555556,"strategyMetrics":{"beam_search":{"name":"BeamSearchStrategy","nodesExplored":144,"averageScore":0.4404861111111108,"maxDepth":5,"beamWidth":3,"activeBeams":2,"totalBeamNodes":3},"mcts":{"name":"MonteCarloTreeSearchStrategy","nodesExplored":144,"averageScore":0.4404861111111108,"maxDepth":5,"simulationDepth":5,"numSimulations":100,"explorationConstant":1.4142135623730951,"totalSimulations":**101**,"active":true}}}}

I wonder if the issue is that it's not reflected in the input?

As far as chatting you can reach me @ [email protected]

frgmt0 added 3 commits January 7, 2025 17:44
added 2 experimental reasoning algorithms

cleaned up codebase to reduce redundant files while retaining the functionality

changed metrics to include new experimental reasoning algorithms when they are used

Updated README.md

Updated LICENSE to 2025
@frgmt0
Copy link
Contributor Author

frgmt0 commented Jan 8, 2025

this one is more in depth and a major update id say

I also added some more verification for the mcts strategy that its being used and cleaned up some unused files.

I think for ToT (Tree of Thought) we can add that as a strategy later rather than a separate engine

@frgmt0 frgmt0 changed the title minor version update minor version update + major edits Jan 8, 2025
@Jacck Jacck merged commit ee93c70 into Jacck:main Jan 8, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants