Instruct/Base clarification + formatting
First of all, please clarify if this model is base/completion, or instruct-tuned. Additionally, it would be useful to know if few-shot capabilities were tested. A prompting format, if any tested, would be nice too.
Please understand that models without instruction capabilities are quite hard to test in practical environment, such models will never get enough attention even when deserved.
It seems to be a base model and seems to have some few-shot abilities as it can do 1-shot translation. But yeah, an instruct version would be nice.
First of all, please clarify if this model is base/completion, or instruct-tuned. Additionally, it would be useful to know if few-shot capabilities were tested. A prompting format, if any tested, would be nice too.
Please understand that models without instruction capabilities are quite hard to test in practical environment, such models will never get enough attention even when deserved.
Hi! Sorry for the confusion - it is a base model, I thought it is conveyed by "Foundational". We are currently working on 1) evaluating it, 2) instruction-tuning it to grounded tasks. The resulting models will be published as they become available.
Creating a general open-question answering model is very low on our priority list, but we might do so in a few months. Aligning it with human preferences and ethics is very difficult, and not doing the alignment poses ethical risks.
Aligning it with human preferences and ethics is very difficult, and not doing the alignment poses ethical risks.
This is unfortunate to hear; please look at Mistral and learn by their mistakes. They've released Mistral Small 3 in a more censored state than should've, and they had to spend 2 more iterations fixing it. While MS 3.2 is relatively popular, it's not nearly as popular as it could be.
The "ethics" you talk about will only limit the adoption of your model and hurt your research in the future, as less community interest means less testing, less feedback and less improvement over time. It's refreshing that you communicate (unlike Mistral, again), but if you follow the same mistakes, it will lead you nowhere.
Creating a general open-question answering model is very low on our priority list, but we might do so in a few months. Aligning it with human preferences and ethics is very difficult, and not doing the alignment poses ethical risks.
Don't waste too much resources on Ethics, beyond legal liabilities. In the line of what Notafraud said, there's not much interest for dumbified models around here, and it's harder to de-dumbify them later than it is to dumbify them in the first instance. Up to those adopting your foundation models to align/censor them for their purpose and related audience.
Ok! We will see what we can do!