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

Add: Auto Confirm For Self-Feedback #3934 #4000

Closed
wants to merge 0 commits into from
Closed

Add: Auto Confirm For Self-Feedback #3934 #4000

wants to merge 0 commits into from

Conversation

AbTrax
Copy link
Contributor

@AbTrax AbTrax commented May 8, 2023

Background

#3934

Changes

Added Autoconfirm for when self-feedback is used as to #3934

Documentation

Test Plan

PR Quality Checklist

  • My pull request is atomic and focuses on a single change.
  • I have thoroughly tested my changes with multiple different prompts.
  • I have considered potential risks and mitigations for my changes.
  • I have documented my changes clearly and comprehensively.
  • I have not snuck in any "extra" small tweaks changes

@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented May 8, 2023

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

1 Ignored Deployment
Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
docs ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Visit Preview May 12, 2023 10:41am

@github-actions github-actions bot added the size/l label May 8, 2023
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 8, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 2.70% and project coverage change: +0.21 🎉

Comparison is base (bc6f8a2) 60.72% compared to head (f97e454) 60.93%.

❗ Current head f97e454 differs from pull request most recent head 1790800. Consider uploading reports for the commit 1790800 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4000      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   60.72%   60.93%   +0.21%     
==========================================
  Files          73       73              
  Lines        3320     3315       -5     
  Branches      475      543      +68     
==========================================
+ Hits         2016     2020       +4     
+ Misses       1164     1156       -8     
+ Partials      140      139       -1     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
autogpt/agent/agent.py 46.71% <2.70%> (-1.59%) ⬇️

... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@@ -87,6 +87,7 @@ def start_interaction_loop(self):
command_name = None
arguments = None
user_input = ""
auto_confirm = False
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@AbTrax I am on your branch, running python -m autogpt --debug and I keep typing "s"
And it keeps sending back a very long sentence if it agrees with the next action.
And on top of that it doesn't do the actual action, this means if I keep typing s it will keep doing nothing

Here is what we want:
typing s should do the next action if supervisor agrees, otherwise it should give clear and concise sentence to nudge the agent in the right direction.

Please look at my debug files to see the issue for yourself.
DEBUG.zip

Also you didn't pick the work of @Torantulino in his commit, this commit looks pretty good

@waynehamadi
Copy link
Contributor

@AbTrax I am on your branch, running python -m autogpt --debug and I keep typing "s"
And it keeps sending back a very long sentence if it agrees with the next action.
And on top of that it doesn't do the actual action, this means if I keep typing s it will keep doing nothing

Here is what we want:
typing s should do the next action if supervisor agrees, otherwise it should give clear and concise sentence to nudge the agent in the right direction.

Please look at my debug files to see the issue for yourself.
DEBUG.zip

Also you didn't pick the work of @Torantulino in his PR.

@waynehamadi waynehamadi closed this May 8, 2023
@waynehamadi waynehamadi reopened this May 8, 2023
@vercel vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview May 11, 2023 10:07 Inactive
@AbTrax AbTrax requested review from waynehamadi and removed request for waynehamadi May 12, 2023 10:40
@Boostrix
Copy link
Contributor

if anybody has got a clever idea how to use self-feedback to tell that we're inside a redundant loop, please speak up, I implemented a crude first stab at #3668 by hashing the response hash (thoughts) in conjunction with the upcoming commands + args (all stringified), and it's working nicely to notice that we're about to do something that we have previously done - but that's obviously not the complete story.

We need a way to tell where exactly we're in our top-level plan, to decide if we really want to continue or discard the current iteration.

This (PR #3668 ) is just based on hashing full thoughts + new decision (command + args) and incrementing a counter every time we get to see the same "situation":
bailout

PS: See also: #4129

@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented May 14, 2023

Deployment failed with the following error:

Resource is limited - try again in 58 minutes (more than 100, code: "api-deployments-free-per-day").

@AbTrax AbTrax closed this May 14, 2023
@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented May 14, 2023

Deployment failed with the following error:

Resource is limited - try again in 55 minutes (more than 100, code: "api-deployments-free-per-day").

@github-actions github-actions bot added size/xs and removed size/l labels May 14, 2023
@AbTrax AbTrax deleted the fix/self-feedback-auto-confirmation branch May 14, 2023 02:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants