|
--- |
|
language: en |
|
tags: |
|
- text-classification |
|
- onnx |
|
- emotions |
|
- multi-class-classification |
|
- multi-label-classification |
|
datasets: |
|
- go_emotions |
|
license: mit |
|
inference: false |
|
widget: |
|
- text: ONNX is so much faster, its very handy! |
|
--- |
|
|
|
### Overview |
|
|
|
This is a multi-label, multi-class linear classifer for emotions that works with [sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L12-v2](https://huggingface.co/sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L12-v2), having been trained on the [go_emotions](https://huggingface.co/datasets/go_emotions) dataset. |
|
|
|
### Labels |
|
|
|
The 28 labels from the [go_emotions](https://huggingface.co/datasets/go_emotions) dataset are: |
|
``` |
|
['admiration', 'amusement', 'anger', 'annoyance', 'approval', 'caring', 'confusion', 'curiosity', 'desire', 'disappointment', 'disapproval', 'disgust', 'embarrassment', 'excitement', 'fear', 'gratitude', 'grief', 'joy', 'love', 'nervousness', 'optimism', 'pride', 'realization', 'relief', 'remorse', 'sadness', 'surprise', 'neutral'] |
|
``` |
|
|
|
### Metrics (exact match of labels per item) |
|
|
|
This is a multi-label, multi-class dataset, so each label is effectively a separate binary classification. Evaluating across all labels per item in the go_emotions test split the metrics are shown below. |
|
|
|
Optimising the threshold per label to optimise the F1 metric, the metrics (evaluated on the go_emotions test split) are: |
|
|
|
- Precision: 0.378 |
|
- Recall: 0.438 |
|
- F1: 0.394 |
|
|
|
Weighted by the relative support of each label in the dataset, this is: |
|
|
|
- Precision: 0.424 |
|
- Recall: 0.590 |
|
- F1: 0.481 |
|
|
|
Using a fixed threshold of 0.5 to convert the scores to binary predictions for each label, the metrics (evaluated on the go_emotions test split, and unweighted by support) are: |
|
|
|
- Precision: 0.568 |
|
- Recall: 0.214 |
|
- F1: 0.260 |
|
|
|
### Metrics (per-label) |
|
|
|
This is a multi-label, multi-class dataset, so each label is effectively a separate binary classification and metrics are better measured per label. |
|
|
|
Optimising the threshold per label to optimise the F1 metric, the metrics (evaluated on the go_emotions test split) are: |
|
| | f1 | precision | recall | support | threshold | |
|
| -------------- | ----- | --------- | ------ | ------- | --------- | |
|
| admiration | 0.540 | 0.463 | 0.649 | 504 | 0.20 | |
|
| amusement | 0.686 | 0.669 | 0.705 | 264 | 0.25 | |
|
| anger | 0.419 | 0.373 | 0.480 | 198 | 0.15 | |
|
| annoyance | 0.276 | 0.189 | 0.512 | 320 | 0.10 | |
|
| approval | 0.299 | 0.260 | 0.350 | 351 | 0.15 | |
|
| caring | 0.303 | 0.219 | 0.489 | 135 | 0.10 | |
|
| confusion | 0.284 | 0.269 | 0.301 | 153 | 0.15 | |
|
| curiosity | 0.365 | 0.310 | 0.444 | 284 | 0.15 | |
|
| desire | 0.274 | 0.237 | 0.325 | 83 | 0.15 | |
|
| disappointment | 0.188 | 0.292 | 0.139 | 151 | 0.20 | |
|
| disapproval | 0.305 | 0.257 | 0.375 | 267 | 0.15 | |
|
| disgust | 0.450 | 0.462 | 0.439 | 123 | 0.20 | |
|
| embarrassment | 0.348 | 0.375 | 0.324 | 37 | 0.30 | |
|
| excitement | 0.313 | 0.306 | 0.320 | 103 | 0.20 | |
|
| fear | 0.550 | 0.505 | 0.603 | 78 | 0.25 | |
|
| gratitude | 0.776 | 0.774 | 0.778 | 352 | 0.30 | |
|
| grief | 0.353 | 0.273 | 0.500 | 6 | 0.70 | |
|
| joy | 0.370 | 0.361 | 0.379 | 161 | 0.20 | |
|
| love | 0.626 | 0.717 | 0.555 | 238 | 0.35 | |
|
| nervousness | 0.308 | 0.276 | 0.348 | 23 | 0.55 | |
|
| optimism | 0.436 | 0.432 | 0.441 | 186 | 0.20 | |
|
| pride | 0.444 | 0.545 | 0.375 | 16 | 0.60 | |
|
| realization | 0.171 | 0.146 | 0.207 | 145 | 0.10 | |
|
| relief | 0.133 | 0.250 | 0.091 | 11 | 0.60 | |
|
| remorse | 0.468 | 0.426 | 0.518 | 56 | 0.30 | |
|
| sadness | 0.413 | 0.409 | 0.417 | 156 | 0.20 | |
|
| surprise | 0.314 | 0.303 | 0.326 | 141 | 0.15 | |
|
| neutral | 0.622 | 0.482 | 0.879 | 1787 | 0.25 | |
|
|
|
### Use with ONNXRuntime |
|
|
|
The input to the model is called `logits`, and there is one output per label. Each output produces a 2d array, with 1 row per input row, and each row having 2 columns - the first being a proba output for the negative case, and the second being a proba output for the positive case. |
|
|
|
```python |
|
# Assuming you have embeddings from all-MiniLM-L12-v2 for the input sentences |
|
# E.g. produced from sentence-transformers such as: |
|
# huggingface.co/sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L12-v2 |
|
# or from an ONNX version E.g. huggingface.co/Xenova/all-MiniLM-L12-v2 |
|
|
|
print(embeddings.shape) # E.g. a batch of 1 sentence |
|
> (1, 384) |
|
|
|
import onnxruntime as ort |
|
|
|
sess = ort.InferenceSession("path_to_model_dot_onnx", providers=['CPUExecutionProvider']) |
|
|
|
outputs = [o.name for o in sess.get_outputs()] # list of labels, in the order of the outputs |
|
preds_onnx = sess.run(_outputs, {'logits': embeddings}) |
|
# preds_onnx is a list with 28 entries, one per label, |
|
# each with a numpy array of shape (1, 2) given the input was a batch of 1 |
|
|
|
print(outputs[0]) |
|
> surprise |
|
print(preds_onnx[0]) |
|
> array([[0.97136074, 0.02863926]], dtype=float32) |
|
``` |
|
|
|
### Commentary on the dataset |
|
|
|
Some labels (E.g. gratitude) when considered independently perform very strongly, whilst others (E.g. relief) perform very poorly. |
|
|
|
This is a challenging dataset. Labels such as relief do have much fewer examples in the training data (less than 100 out of the 40k+, and only 11 in the test split). |
|
|
|
But there is also some ambiguity and/or labelling errors visible in the training data of go_emotions that is suspected to constrain the performance. Data cleaning on the dataset to reduce some of the mistakes, ambiguity, conflicts and duplication in the labelling would produce a higher performing model. |
