Scheduled Commit

data/retrieval_battle-b9229914-47bc-4da8-a21b-89329fff8207.jsonl

@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
 {"tstamp": 1722305246.8396, "task_type": "retrieval", "type": "rightvote", "models": ["", ""], "ip": "", "0_conv_id": "6cf9d4db20f8436c8c7f2ccaca29d2fa", "0_model_name": "sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L6-v2", "0_prompt": "what is the difference between cluster point and limit point?", "0_output": [["what is the difference between cluster point and limit point?", "Askubuntu Stackexchange\n\nQ: How to enable user sharing per instructions? I have this entry in .xsession-errors log\n\"Nautilus-Share-Message: Called \"net usershare info\" but it failed: 'net usershare' returned \nerror 255: net usershare: cannot open usershare directory /var/lib/samba/usershares.         \nError No such file or directory\nPlease ask your system administrator to enable user sharing.\n\nThis is in relation to my applets having to be reloaded after every boot. Just wondering how I would enable user sharing, and how it affects my applets ??\n\nA: I don't think this effects your applets at all, that's probably a different bug. You could just make the directory with sudo:\nsudo mkdir -p /var/lib/samba/usershares\n\nBut I don't really know what it will do.\n"]], "0_corpus": "stackexchange", "1_conv_id": "38308d8cc72f4a24b8ddc6bafec79a96", "1_model_name": "BAAI/bge-large-en-v1.5", "1_prompt": "what is the difference between cluster point and limit point?", "1_output": [["what is the difference between cluster point and limit point?", "Math Stackexchange\n\nQ: Limit and limit points What is the basic difference between limit and limit points, and if a sequence has one unique limit how it can have a lot of limit points \n\nA: A limit point is a generalization of a limit (each limit is a limit point but not vice versa). You can see this in the definition:\nLimit: $a$ is a limit of $(a_n)$, iff in each neighborhood of $a$ are almost all elements of $(a_n)$.\nLimit point: $a$ is a limit of $(a_n)$, iff in each neighborhood of $a$ are infinite elements of $(a_n)$.\nI highlighted the difference between both definitions.\nBecause only infinite elements need to be in any neighborhood of $a$. There can be infinite elements outside this neighborhood which can clustered to another limit point. This is the reason why there might be many limit points for a sequence. If $a$ is a limit only finite elements can be outside any given neighborhood which is not enough to go to another limit.\n"]], "1_corpus": "stackexchange"}
 {"tstamp": 1722306411.5045, "task_type": "retrieval", "type": "rightvote", "models": ["", ""], "ip": "", "0_conv_id": "5993407c26d04c54981a49217a38518d", "0_model_name": "Alibaba-NLP/gte-Qwen2-7B-instruct", "0_prompt": "when did scotland last qualify for world cup", "0_output": [["when did scotland last qualify for world cup", "Scotland national football team\n\nScotland lost just two of their first 43 international matches. It was not until a 2–0 home defeat by Ireland in 1903 that Scotland lost a match to a team other than England. This run of success meant that Scotland would have regularly topped the Elo ratings, which were calculated in 1998, between 1876 and 1904. Scotland won the British Home Championship outright on 24 occasions, and shared the title 17 times with at least one other team. A noteworthy victory for Scotland before the Second World War was the 5–1 victory over England in 1928, which led to that Scotland side being known as the \"Wembley Wizards\". Scotland played their first match outside the British Isles in 1929, beating Norway 7–3 in Bergen. Scotland continued to contest regular friendly matches against European opposition and enjoyed wins against Germany and France before losing to the Austrian \"Wunderteam\" and Italy in 1931.\nScotland, like the other Home Nations, did not enter the three FIFA World Cups held during the 1930s. This was because the four associations had been excluded from FIFA due to a disagreement regarding the status of amateur players. The four associations, including Scotland, returned to the FIFA fold after the Second World War. A match between a United Kingdom team and a \"Rest of the World\" team was played at Hampden Park in 1947 to celebrate this reconciliation.\n1950s: Entering the World Cup"]], "0_corpus": "wikipedia", "1_conv_id": "940948f56e9c4f5297cb17f69935bd8b", "1_model_name": "Salesforce/SFR-Embedding-2_R", "1_prompt": "when did scotland last qualify for world cup", "1_output": [["when did scotland last qualify for world cup", "Scotland at the FIFA World Cup\n\nThe World Cup consists of two parts, the qualification phase and the final phase (officially called the World Cup Finals). The qualification phase, which currently take place over the three years preceding the Finals, is used to determine which teams qualify for the Finals. The current format of the Finals involves 32 teams competing at venues within the host nation (or nations) over a period of about a month. The World Cup Finals is the most widely viewed sporting event in the world, with an estimated 715.1 million people watching the 2006 tournament final.\nHistory\n1930s\nScotland did not compete in the first three World Cup competitions, in 1930, 1934 and 1938. Because of a dispute with FIFA over \"broken-time\" payments to players, the SFA, with the football associations of England, Ireland and Wales, withdrew from FIFA in 1928, and did not rejoin as a permanent member until 1946.\n1950s\nThe readmission of the Scottish Football Association to FIFA in 1946 meant that Scotland were now eligible to enter the 1950 FIFA World Cup. FIFA advised that places would be awarded to the top two teams in the 1949–50 British Home Championship, but the SFA announced that Scotland would attend the finals only if Scotland won the competition. Scotland won their first two matches, but a 1–0 home defeat by England meant that the Scots finished as runners-up. The SFA stood by this proclamation, despite pleas to the contrary by the Scotland players, supported by England captain Billy Wright and the other England players. Sportswriter Brian Glanville later described the SFA as showing \"baffling insularity and pique\" in their refusal to send a team to the World Cup."]], "1_corpus": "wikipedia"}
+{"tstamp": 1722307573.5271, "task_type": "retrieval", "type": "tievote", "models": ["", ""], "ip": "", "0_conv_id": "9deb3465ffd3458081570489c3810813", "0_model_name": "mixedbread-ai/mxbai-embed-large-v1", "0_prompt": "are opened or are open?", "0_output": [["are opened or are open?", "Ell Stackexchange\n\nQ: Are they the same in meaning, the open door and the opened door? What is the difference between \"the open door\" and \"the opened door\"? Are they the same in meaning? Please explain it. Thanks a lot.\n\nA: Open is an adjective. \nOpened is a past participle used as a modifier. \nThe difference in meaning is that open is in contrast to not open. The door  could have been open for ten years or a century. It could always be open. \nOpened expands to The \"having been opened\" door...\nThis refers to the action of the door having been opened. The door used to be shut, now it is open. It has been opened. It has not always been open. It could have been opened ten years ago or two  seconds ago, but at some point it was closed. \n"]], "0_corpus": "stackexchange", "1_conv_id": "9913e8b8325c4550a0bfb3f5298189d2", "1_model_name": "BM25", "1_prompt": "are opened or are open?", "1_output": [["are opened or are open?", "Ell Stackexchange\n\nQ: Are they the same in meaning, the open door and the opened door? What is the difference between \"the open door\" and \"the opened door\"? Are they the same in meaning? Please explain it. Thanks a lot.\n\nA: Open is an adjective. \nOpened is a past participle used as a modifier. \nThe difference in meaning is that open is in contrast to not open. The door  could have been open for ten years or a century. It could always be open. \nOpened expands to The \"having been opened\" door...\nThis refers to the action of the door having been opened. The door used to be shut, now it is open. It has been opened. It has not always been open. It could have been opened ten years ago or two  seconds ago, but at some point it was closed. \n"]], "1_corpus": "stackexchange"}

data/retrieval_individual-b9229914-47bc-4da8-a21b-89329fff8207.jsonl

@@ -35,3 +35,5 @@
 {"tstamp": 1722307112.9208, "task_type": "retrieval", "type": "chat", "model": "embed-english-v3.0", "gen_params": {}, "start": 1722307112.5638, "finish": 1722307112.9208, "ip": "", "conv_id": "3754c3b0f9fd448eac01d2cebd94e498", "model_name": "embed-english-v3.0", "prompt": "Is attention all I need?", "output": [["Is attention all I need?", "Title: Attention is all they need: Cognitive science and the (techno)political economy of attention in humans and machines\n\nAbstract: This paper critically analyses the \"attention economy\" within the framework of cognitive science and techno-political economics, as applied to both human and machine interactions. We explore how current business models, particularly in digital platform capitalism, harness user engagement by strategically shaping attentional patterns. These platforms utilize advanced AI and massive data analytics to enhance user engagement, creating a cycle of attention capture and data extraction. We review contemporary (neuro)cognitive theories of attention and platform engagement design techniques and criticize classical cognitivist and behaviourist theories for their inadequacies in addressing the potential harms of such engagement on user autonomy and wellbeing. 4E approaches to cognitive science, instead, emphasizing the embodied, extended, enactive, and ecological aspects of cognition, offer us an intrinsic normative standpoint and a more integrated understanding of how attentional patterns are actively constituted by adaptive digital environments. By examining the precarious nature of habit formation in digital contexts, we reveal the techno-economic underpinnings that threaten personal autonomy by disaggregating habits away from the individual, into an AI managed collection of behavioural patterns. Our current predicament suggests the necessity of a paradigm shift towards an ecology of attention. This shift aims to foster environments that respect and preserve human cognitive and social capacities, countering the exploitative tendencies of cognitive capitalism."]], "corpus": "arxiv"}
 {"tstamp": 1722307122.7157, "task_type": "retrieval", "type": "chat", "model": "Salesforce/SFR-Embedding-2_R", "gen_params": {}, "start": 1722307120.4275, "finish": 1722307122.7157, "ip": "", "conv_id": "ea468cdfbe3a4dd680a9a7471bed7154", "model_name": "Salesforce/SFR-Embedding-2_R", "prompt": "The effect of long pimple", "output": [["The effect of long pimple", "Table tennis grips and playing styles\n\nShort pips hitter This penhold style utilizes a short pips out rubber, usually on only one side of the racket with no backside rubber. Short pips hitters play over the table, hitting the ball very flatly as soon as it bounces off the table with the pips being largely unaffected by (or even negating) the majority of the opponent's spin. The advantage of hitting the ball flatly is that all of the player's power is transferred into the linear velocity of the ball, without expending any energy on creating spin. This means that the shots are very fast, and typically hard to block for the inexperienced player. However, the lack of a topspin Magnus effect means that the shots are harder to place on the table since they don't follow a downward arc trajectory, and the lack of angular momentum on the ball means that shots are less consistent and more sensitive to small amounts of wind or air pressure, often giving a knuckle ball effect.\nNotable penhold short pips hitters include 1996 Olympic Champion Liu Guoliang, 1985 and 1987 World Champion Jiang Jialiang, three-time Olympian Toshio Tasaki, Yang Ying, Kwak Bang-bang, Seok Eun-mi, He Zhi Wen, Lee Eun-hee, Wang Zeng Yi and Rory Cargill.\nShakehand playing styles"]], "corpus": "wikipedia"}
 {"tstamp": 1722307143.5212, "task_type": "retrieval", "type": "chat", "model": "GritLM/GritLM-7B", "gen_params": {}, "start": 1722307143.3926, "finish": 1722307143.5212, "ip": "", "conv_id": "ef28c889daf44e7587446e62092e3d2a", "model_name": "GritLM/GritLM-7B", "prompt": "Is attention all I need?", "output": [["Is attention all I need?", "Title: Attention Is All You Need\n\nAbstract: The dominant sequence transduction models are based on complex recurrent or convolutional neural networks in an encoder-decoder configuration. The best performing models also connect the encoder and decoder through an attention mechanism. We propose a new simple network architecture, the Transformer, based solely on attention mechanisms, dispensing with recurrence and convolutions entirely. Experiments on two machine translation tasks show these models to be superior in quality while being more parallelizable and requiring significantly less time to train. Our model achieves 28.4 BLEU on the WMT 2014 English-to-German translation task, improving over the existing best results, including ensembles by over 2 BLEU. On the WMT 2014 English-to-French translation task, our model establishes a new single-model state-of-the-art BLEU score of 41.8 after training for 3.5 days on eight GPUs, a small fraction of the training costs of the best models from the literature. We show that the Transformer generalizes well to other tasks by applying it successfully to English constituency parsing both with large and limited training data."]], "corpus": "arxiv"}
+{"tstamp": 1722307566.3844, "task_type": "retrieval", "type": "chat", "model": "mixedbread-ai/mxbai-embed-large-v1", "gen_params": {}, "start": 1722307566.1887, "finish": 1722307566.3844, "ip": "", "conv_id": "9deb3465ffd3458081570489c3810813", "model_name": "mixedbread-ai/mxbai-embed-large-v1", "prompt": "are opened or are open?", "output": [["are opened or are open?", "Ell Stackexchange\n\nQ: Are they the same in meaning, the open door and the opened door? What is the difference between \"the open door\" and \"the opened door\"? Are they the same in meaning? Please explain it. Thanks a lot.\n\nA: Open is an adjective. \nOpened is a past participle used as a modifier. \nThe difference in meaning is that open is in contrast to not open. The door  could have been open for ten years or a century. It could always be open. \nOpened expands to The \"having been opened\" door...\nThis refers to the action of the door having been opened. The door used to be shut, now it is open. It has been opened. It has not always been open. It could have been opened ten years ago or two  seconds ago, but at some point it was closed. \n"]], "corpus": "stackexchange"}
+{"tstamp": 1722307566.3844, "task_type": "retrieval", "type": "chat", "model": "BM25", "gen_params": {}, "start": 1722307566.1887, "finish": 1722307566.3844, "ip": "", "conv_id": "9913e8b8325c4550a0bfb3f5298189d2", "model_name": "BM25", "prompt": "are opened or are open?", "output": [["are opened or are open?", "Ell Stackexchange\n\nQ: Are they the same in meaning, the open door and the opened door? What is the difference between \"the open door\" and \"the opened door\"? Are they the same in meaning? Please explain it. Thanks a lot.\n\nA: Open is an adjective. \nOpened is a past participle used as a modifier. \nThe difference in meaning is that open is in contrast to not open. The door  could have been open for ten years or a century. It could always be open. \nOpened expands to The \"having been opened\" door...\nThis refers to the action of the door having been opened. The door used to be shut, now it is open. It has been opened. It has not always been open. It could have been opened ten years ago or two  seconds ago, but at some point it was closed. \n"]], "corpus": "stackexchange"}