FredZhang7/claudegpt-code-logic-debugger-v0.1

Code Logic Debugger v0.1

Hardware requirements for ChatGPT GPT-4o level inference speed for the models in this repo: >=24 GB VRAM.

Note: The following results are based on my day-to-day workflows only on an RTX 3090. My goal was to run private models that could beat GPT-4o and Claude-3.5 in code debugging and generation to ‘load balance’ between OpenAI/Anthropic’s free plan and local models to avoid hitting rate limits, and to upload as few lines of my code and ideas to their servers as possible.

An example of a complex debugging scenario is where you build library A on top of library B that requires library C as a dependency but the root cause was a variable in library C. In this case, the following workflow guided me to correctly identify the problem.

Throughput

IQ here refers to Importance Matrix Quantization. For performance comparison against regular GGUF, please read this Reddit post. For more info on the techique, please see this GitHub discussion.

Personal Preference Ranking

Evaluated on two programming tasks: debugging and generation. It may be a bit subjective. DeepSeekV2 Coder Instruct is ranked lower because DeepSeek's Privacy Policy says that they may collect "text input, prompt" and there's no way around it.

Code debugging/editing prompt template used:

<code>
<current output>
<the problem description of the current output>
<expected output (in English is fine)>
<any hints>
Think step by step. Solve this problem without removing any existing functionalities, logic, or checks, except any incorrect code that interferes with your edits.

Rank	Model Name	Token Speed (tokens/s)	Debugging Performance	Code Generation Performance	Notes
1*	codestral-22b-v0.1-IQ6_K.gguf (this repo)	34.21	Excellent at complex debugging, often surpasses GPT-4o and Claude-3.5	Good, but may not be par with GPT-4o	One of the best overall for debugging in my workflow, use Balanced Mode.
1*	Claude-3.5-Sonnet	N/A	Poor in complex debugging compared to Codestral	Excellent, better in design and more creative than GPT-4o in code generation	Great for code generation, but weaker in debugging.
1*	GPT-4o	N/A	Good at complex debugging but can be outperformed by Codestral	Excellent, generally reliable for code generation, more knowledgable	Balanced performance between code debugging and generation.
4	DeepSeekV2 Coder Instruct	N/A	Good, but outputs the same code in complex scenarios	Excellent at general code generation, rivals GPT-4o	Excellent at code generation, but has data privacy concerns as per Privacy Policy.
5*	Qwen2-7b-Instruct bf16	78.22	Average, can think of correct approaches	Sometimes helps generate new ideas	High speed, useful for generating ideas.
5*	AutoCoder.IQ4_K.gguf (this repo)	26.43	Excellent at solutions that require one to few lines of edits	Generates useful short code segments	Try Precise Mode or Balanced Mode.
7	GPT-4o-mini	N/A	Decent, but struggles with complex debugging tasks	Reliable for shorter or simpler code generation tasks	Suitable for less complex coding tasks.
8	Meta-Llama-3.1-70B-Instruct-IQ2_XS.gguf	2.55	Poor, occasionally helps generate ideas	---	Speed is a significant limitation.
9	Trinity-2-Codestral-22B-Q6_K_L	N/A	Poor, similar issues to DeepSeekV2 in outputing the same code	---	Similar problem to DeepSeekV2, not recommended for my complex tasks.
10	DeepSeekV2 Coder Lite Instruct Q_8L	N/A	Poor, repeats code similar to other models in its family	Not as effective in my context	Not recommended overall based on my criteria.

Generation Kwargs

Balanced Mode:

generation_kwargs = {
    "max_tokens":8192,
    "stop":["<|EOT|>", "</s>", "<｜end▁of▁sentence｜>", "<eos>", "<|start_header_id|>", "<|end_header_id|>", "<|eot_id|>"],
    "temperature":0.7,
    "stream":True,
    "top_k":50,
    "top_p":0.95,
}

Precise Mode:

generation_kwargs = {
    "max_tokens":8192,
    "stop":["<|EOT|>", "</s>", "<｜end▁of▁sentence｜>", "<eos>", "<|start_header_id|>", "<|end_header_id|>", "<|eot_id|>"],
    "temperature":0.0,
    "stream":True,
    "top_p":1.0,
}

Qwen2 7B:

generation_kwargs = {
    "max_tokens":8192,
    "stop":["<|EOT|>", "</s>", "<｜end▁of▁sentence｜>", "<eos>", "<|start_header_id|>", "<|end_header_id|>", "<|eot_id|>"],
    "temperature":0.4,
    "stream":True,
    "top_k":20,
    "top_p":0.8,
}

Other variations in temperature, top_k, and top_p were tested 5-8 times per model too, but I'm sticking to the above three.

New Discoveries

The following are tested in my workflow, but may not generalize well to other workflows.

• In general, if there's an error in the code, copy pasting the last few rows of stacktrace (without the library stacktrace) to the LLM seems to work.
• Adding "Reflect." after a failed attempt at code generation sometimes allows Claude-3.5-Sonnet to generate the correct version.
• If GPT-4o reasons correctly in its first response and the conversation is then continued with GPT-4-mini, the mini model can maintain comparable level of reasoning/accuracy as GPT-4o.

License

A reminder that codestral-22b-v0.1-IQ6_K.gguf should only be used for non-commercial projects.

Please use Qwen2-7b-Instruct bf16 and AutoCoder.IQ4_K.gguf as alternatives for commericial activities.

Download

pip install -U "huggingface_hub[cli]"

Commercial use:

huggingface-cli download FredZhang7/claudegpt-code-logic-debugger-v0.1 --include "AutoCoder.IQ4_K.gguf" --local-dir ./

Non-commercial (e.g. testing, research, personal, or evaluation purposes) use:

huggingface-cli download FredZhang7/claudegpt-code-logic-debugger-v0.1 --include "codestral-22b-v0.1-IQ6_K.gguf" --local-dir ./