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

adapter_name problem #15

Open
Harry-mic opened this issue Nov 30, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

adapter_name problem #15

Harry-mic opened this issue Nov 30, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@Harry-mic
Copy link

Hi! I encounter an issue that when doing the Step3(SFT).

The function "get_accelerate_model" in qlora_model.py sets the adapter_name="lora_default". This results in an error that the trainable parameters are set to 0.0 rather than 1.6% of the full parameters:

def get_accelerate_model(
    args: Namespace,
    checkpoint_dir: Optional[str] = None,
    adapter_name="lora_default",
    is_trainable=True,
    reuse_base_model=False,
):

I fix this by setting the adapter_name="default". I am finetuning a llama-2-7b-hf model and I wonder if it is a bug or an issue caused by the different finetuned model(7b and 70b)

@Edward-Sun
Copy link
Contributor

Hi, it's unlike the problem of the difference between 7b and 70b.

What is the version of the PEFT you used? We use peft==4.0.0 in our experiments, and perhaps the behavior is different in newer or older versions.

@Harry-mic
Copy link
Author

Thanks for your reply!

I use the peft==0.6.3.dev0 version and I think that's the point.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants