svjack/aya-23-8B-GGUF

b3039 sf

import llama_cpp
import llama_cpp.llama_tokenizer

llm = llama_cpp.Llama.from_pretrained(
    repo_id="svjack/aya-23-8B-GGUF",
    filename="*q4_0.gguf",
    tokenizer=llama_cpp.llama_tokenizer.LlamaHFTokenizer.from_pretrained("CohereForAI/aya-23-8B"),
    verbose=False,
    #n_gpu_layers = -1,
    n_gpu_layers = 30,
    n_ctx = 3060
)

prompt =  '''
将下面的json内容翻译成中文，并保留相应的json格式:
    {'problem_description': "Two space agencies, Galactic Explorations and Interstellar Missions, are discussing the potential of Planet X-31 for human colonization. Galactic Explorations claims that Planet X-31 is an ideal candidate due to its Earth-like atmosphere and abundant water resources. Interstellar Missions, however, argues that Planet X-31 is not suitable for colonization because of its high levels of radiation, which they claim would make it impossible for humans to survive there. Galactic Explorations counters this argument by stating that humans could develop technology to shield themselves from radiation in the future. Which statement best describes the fallacy in Galactic Explorations' argument?", 'additional_problem_info': "A) The fallacy is that Galactic Explorations assumes humans can develop technology to shield themselves from radiation without any evidence. \nB) The fallacy is that Interstellar Missions is incorrect about the high levels of radiation on Planet X-31. \nC) The fallacy is that Galactic Explorations believes Planet X-31 is the only planet suitable for human colonization. \nD) The fallacy is that Interstellar Missions doesn't believe in the potential of human technological advancements.", 'chain_of_thought': "Galactic Explorations' argument assumes that humans will be able to develop technology to shield themselves from radiation in the future. However, there is no evidence presented in the problem description to support this claim. Therefore, their argument contains a fallacy.", 'correct_solution': 'A) The fallacy is that Galactic Explorations assumes humans can develop technology to shield themselves from radiation without any evidence.'}
'''

messages = [
    {
        "role": "user",
        "content": prompt
    }
]
response = llm.create_chat_completion(
            messages=messages,
            stream=False,
            )

print(response["choices"][0]["message"]["content"])

Output

{'问题描述': "两个太空机构，银河探索和星际任务，正在讨论行星X-31的人类殖民潜力。银河探索声称，由于其地球般的大气和丰富的水资源，行星X-31是人类殖民的理想候选者。然而，星际任务认为，由于其高水平的辐射，行星X-31不适合殖民，他们声称这会使人类无法生存。银河探索反驳这一论点，称人类将来可以开发技术来保护自己免受辐射的影响。哪种说法最好地描述了银河探索的论证中的谬误？", '额外问题信息': "A) 谬误在于银河探索假设人类可以开发出没有证据的支持技术来保护自己免受辐射。
B) 谬误在于星际任务关于行星X-31具有高水平辐射的说法是错误的。
C) 谬误在于银河探索认为行星X-31是人类殖民的唯一适合的行星。
D) 谬误在于星际任务不相信人类技术进步的潜力。", '思路': "银河探索的论证假设人类将来可以开发出保护自己免受辐射的技术。然而，问题描述中没有证据支持这一说法，因此他们的论证存在谬误。", '正确解决方案': 'A) 谬误在于银河探索假设人类可以开发出没有证据的支持技术来保护自己免受辐射。'}