-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
Categorical Prophet #132
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
Categorical Prophet #132
Conversation
| agent: Agent | None, | ||
| include_reasoning: bool = False, | ||
| ) -> CategoricalPrediction: | ||
| agent = agent or Agent(model="gpt-3.5-turbo-0125", model_settings=ModelSettings(temperature=0.7)) |
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.
Why this model?
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.
Just copy pasted the defaults there were previously from Agentcoin's team.
Note that in PMA, model is overridden, so it doesn't really matter for us.
TS9001
left a comment
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.
LGTM just nitpicks
| class CategoricalPrediction(TypedDict): | ||
| decision: str | ||
| probabilities: Dict[str, Probability] | ||
| confidence: float | ||
| info_utility: float | ||
| reasoning: Optional[str] |
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.
Rhetorical question: would it be somehow possible to start using pyedantic here? (understand why you did not used it)
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.
Yeah, I just followed Agentcoin's convention in this repo. But if we agree on refactoring this, I don't think they will have any problems with that (given that much bigger changes were implemented already anyway 😄)
Also PydanticAI isn't used to its full potential here, we could do something like:
agent = Agent(
model,
output=CategoricalPrediction
)Instead of parsing it manually, but I didn't want to break the current flow (just to be sure to not break performance of these agents).
But again if we agree on refactoring, and test out that performance remains +/- the same, we can.
No description provided.