mirror of
https://github.com/Aider-AI/aider.git
synced 2025-05-29 00:35:00 +00:00
copy
This commit is contained in:
parent
cffeb275a6
commit
a01208d9c0
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
|
@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ The results were interesting:
|
|||
|
||||
- **Plain text edit formats worked best.** Asking GPT to return an updated copy of the whole file in a standard markdown fenced code block proved to be the most reliable and effective edit format across all GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 models. The results for this `whole` edit format are shown in solid blue in the graph.
|
||||
- **Function calls performed worse.** Using the new functions API for edits performed worse than the above whole file method, for all the models. GPT-3.5 especially produced inferior code and frequently mangled this output format. This was surprising, as the functions API was introduced to enhance the reliability of structured outputs. The results for these `...-func` edit methods are shown as patterned bars in the graph (both green and blue).
|
||||
- **The new GPT-3.5 models did worse than the old model.** The performance of the new June (`0613`) versions of GPT-3.5 appears to be a bit worse than the February (`0301`) version. This is visible if you look at the "first attempt" markers on the first three solid blue bars and also by comparing the first three solid green `diff` bars.
|
||||
- **The new June GPT-3.5 models did a bit worse than the old June model.** The performance of the new June (`0613`) versions of GPT-3.5 appears to be a bit worse than the February (`0301`) version. This is visible if you look at the "first attempt" markers on the first three solid blue bars and also by comparing the first three solid green `diff` bars.
|
||||
- **GPT-4 does better than GPT-3.5,** as expected.
|
||||
|
||||
The quantitative benchmark results agree with my intuitions
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue