Skip to content

Fix handling of Sequence post-processors in train_new_from_iterator - #34246

Closed
taidopurason wants to merge 2 commits into
huggingface:mainfrom
taidopurason:train_new_from_iterator_fix
Closed

taidopurason wants to merge 2 commits into
huggingface:mainfrom
taidopurason:train_new_from_iterator_fix

Conversation

@taidopurason

Copy link
Copy Markdown

What does this PR do?

This PR fixes an issue where the post-processor special token IDs are not correctly updated when training a new tokenizer using train_new_from_iterator of a tokenizer with a Sequence post-processor. Instead, the special token IDs are copied directly from the original tokenizer.

For example, this affects training a new tokenizer from Llama-3 tokenizers, as reported in #33998 and #30752.

Running the following code:

from transformers import AutoTokenizer
from datasets import load_dataset
import json
from itertools import islice

tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained("meta-llama/Meta-Llama-3.1-8B")
ds = load_dataset("wikimedia/wikipedia", "20231101.et", streaming=True, split="train")

new_tokenizer = tokenizer.train_new_from_iterator([x["text"] for x in islice(ds, 100)], 1000)

print(f"bos_token_id={new_tokenizer.bos_token_id}")
print(f"'Hello world!' tokenized as {new_tokenizer('Hello world!')['input_ids']}")
print(json.dumps(json.loads(new_tokenizer._tokenizer.to_str())['post_processor'], indent=2))

the output is:

bos_token_id=0
'Hello world!' tokenized as [128000, 294, 569, 727, 399, 338, 541, 327, 319, 256]
{
  "type": "Sequence",
  "processors": [
    {
      "type": "ByteLevel",
      "add_prefix_space": true,
      "trim_offsets": false,
      "use_regex": true
    },
    {
      "type": "TemplateProcessing",
      "single": [
        {
          "SpecialToken": {
            "id": "<|begin_of_text|>",
            "type_id": 0
          }
        },
        {
          "Sequence": {
            "id": "A",
            "type_id": 0
          }
        }
      ],
      "pair": [
        {
          "SpecialToken": {
            "id": "<|begin_of_text|>",
            "type_id": 0
          }
        },
        {
          "Sequence": {
            "id": "A",
            "type_id": 0
          }
        },
        {
          "SpecialToken": {
            "id": "<|begin_of_text|>",
            "type_id": 1
          }
        },
        {
          "Sequence": {
            "id": "B",
            "type_id": 1
          }
        }
      ],
      "special_tokens": {
        "<|begin_of_text|>": {
          "id": "<|begin_of_text|>",
          "ids": [
            128000
          ],
          "tokens": [
            "<|begin_of_text|>"
          ]
        }
      }
    }
  ]
}

As shown, the new tokenizer prepends an incorrect bos_token_id (128000 instead of 0)

Fixes #33998 #30752

I welcome feedback and suggestions on this fix.

Before submitting

  • This PR fixes a typo or improves the docs (you can dismiss the other checks if that's the case).
  • Did you read the contributor guideline,
    Pull Request section?
  • Was this discussed/approved via a Github issue or the forum? Please add a link
    to it if that's the case.
  • Did you make sure to update the documentation with your changes? Here are the
    documentation guidelines, and
    here are tips on formatting docstrings.
  • Did you write any new necessary tests?

Who can review?

@LysandreJik

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Thanks for the issue! Also cc @itazap for knowledge (but I know your bandwidth is very limited right now)

post_processor[special_token] = [token, token_id]
_post_processor[special_token] = [token, token_id]

trained_tokenizer_json["post_processor"] = post_processor

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for working on this!! 👍
Should this also be updated to set to _post_processors?

Also, would be great to add a test for this so that we can catch this in the future! Let me know if you would like to contribute the test or I can add it! 🤗

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the feedback! The reason for using _post_processor on the final block is to ensure that if Roberta or BERT processors are ever part of the Sequential postprocessor, their cls and sep token IDs will be correctly updated. I can revert this if you think it’s unnecessary.

Including a unit test is a great idea - I’ll start working on it.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added a test case for the Sequence post-processor. @itazap, let me know what you think. Should anything else be added or changed?

@ArthurZucker

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Thanks a lot for the fix and the test! Since then, src/transformers/tokenization_utils_fast.py was removed in #40936 and train_new_from_iterator now lives in src/transformers/tokenization_utils_tokenizers.py, so this branch can no longer be merged. As far as we can tell that code still only rewrites top-level special_tokens, so if you still run into the Sequence post-processor issue, we'd be happy to review a rebased PR against main. Closing this one in the meantime.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Is the BOS token id of 128000 **hardcoded** into the llama 3.2 tokenizer?

4 participants