Skip to content

Conversation

@yanxi-chen
Copy link
Collaborator

Description

As the title says.

Checklist

Please check the following items before code is ready to be reviewed.

  • Code has passed all tests
  • Docstrings have been added/updated in Google Style
  • Documentation has been updated
  • Code is ready for review

@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @yanxi-chen, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses inconsistencies and potential limitations in the configuration of prompt, response, and sequence lengths across various example configurations and documentation. It primarily updates max_response_tokens and max_model_len values to more appropriate or consistent settings, enhancing the robustness and clarity of the examples for different model training and inference scenarios.

Highlights

  • Configuration Updates: Standardized max_response_tokens and max_model_len across numerous example YAML configuration files to ensure consistent and appropriate settings for model operations.
  • Documentation Alignment: Updated both English and Chinese tutorial documentation files to reflect the new max_response_tokens and max_model_len parameters, enhancing clarity and accuracy for users.
  • Increased Model Lengths: Primarily increased max_model_len from 1280 to 2048 in most example configurations, with specific DPO examples receiving updates to 1536 or 10752 for varied use cases.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request consistently updates various documentation and example configuration files to address issues with prompt, response, and sequence lengths. The changes primarily involve increasing max_model_len and adding max_response_tokens and max_model_len where they were missing. This correctly increases the allowable prompt length in many examples, which was previously too restrictive. The changes are logical and improve the usability of the provided examples. I've found one minor issue regarding a potentially misleading configuration in one of the example files, which I've detailed in a specific comment.

@pan-x-c
Copy link
Collaborator

pan-x-c commented Nov 7, 2025

/unittest-module-common

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Nov 7, 2025

Summary

Tests 📝 Passed ✅ Failed ❌ Skipped ⏭️ Other ❓ Flaky 🍂 Duration ⏱️
34 34 0 0 0 0 4m 56s

Tests

Test Name Status Flaky Duration
tests/common/config_test.py::TestConfig::test_all_examples_are_valid 40.9s
tests/common/config_test.py::TestConfig::test_config_flatten 39ms
tests/common/config_test.py::TestConfig::test_continue_from_checkpoint_is_valid 425ms
tests/common/config_test.py::TestConfig::test_default_workflow 89ms
tests/common/config_test.py::TestConfig::test_load_default_config 3.3s
tests/common/config_test.py::TestConfig::test_max_token_len_per_gpu_set_correctly 93ms
tests/common/config_test.py::TestConfig::test_optimizer_config_propagation 88ms
tests/common/config_test.py::TestConfig::test_update_config_from_ray_cluster 1.9s
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestEID::test_eid_properties 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperience::test_action_mask_and_logprobs_type 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperience::test_assertions 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperience::test_dpo_experience 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperience::test_gather 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperience::test_hf_datasets_conversion 15ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperience::test_multi_turn_experience 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperience::test_serialize_deserialize 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperience::test_single_turn_experience 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperience::test_to_dict 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperienceConversion::test_batch_conversion 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperienceConversion::test_dpo_experience_batch_conversion 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperienceConversion::test_experience_model_experience_conversion 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperienceConversion::test_gather_experiences_with_custom_fields 1ms
tests/common/experience_test.py::TestExperienceConversion::test_multiturn_experience_batch_converstion 1ms
tests/common/vllm_test.py::ModelWrapperTest_0::test_generate 52.7s
tests/common/vllm_test.py::ModelWrapperTest_1::test_generate 32.6s
tests/common/vllm_test.py::ModelWrapperTest_2::test_generate 42.1s
tests/common/vllm_test.py::TestModelLen_0::test_model_len 17.3s
tests/common/vllm_test.py::TestModelLen_1::test_model_len 16.9s
tests/common/vllm_test.py::TestAPIServer::test_api 22.3s
tests/common/vllm_test.py::TestAsyncAPIServer::test_api_async 22.7s
tests/common/vllm_test.py::TestTokenizer::test_action_mask 244ms
tests/common/vllm_test.py::TestTokenizer::test_action_mask_with_tools 237ms
tests/common/vllm_test.py::TestAPIServerToolCall_0_deepseek_r1::test_api_tool_calls 20.1s
tests/common/vllm_test.py::TestAPIServerToolCall_1::test_api_tool_calls 17.7s

Github Test Reporter by CTRF 💚

@pan-x-c pan-x-c merged commit db9012f into agentscope-ai:main Nov 7, 2025
2 checks passed
@yanxi-chen yanxi-chen deleted the doc/fix_doc_Nov_7 branch November 7, 2025 07:45
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.

2 participants