The full dataset viewer is not available (click to read why). Only showing a preview of the rows.
Error code: DatasetGenerationCastError Exception: DatasetGenerationCastError Message: An error occurred while generating the dataset All the data files must have the same columns, but at some point there are 8 new columns ({'eos_token_id', 'do_sample', 'temperature', 'top_p', 'pad_token_id', 'bos_token_id', 'transformers_version', 'max_length'}) and 3 missing columns ({'instruction', 'output', 'input'}). This happened while the json dataset builder was generating data using hf://datasets/efe1903/NEW_TRAINING01/generation_config.json (at revision 22abb54ec5c96853569eded6b5f03c2f5fcb16fa) Please either edit the data files to have matching columns, or separate them into different configurations (see docs at https://hf.co/docs/hub/datasets-manual-configuration#multiple-configurations) Traceback: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/builder.py", line 1831, in _prepare_split_single writer.write_table(table) File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/arrow_writer.py", line 644, in write_table pa_table = table_cast(pa_table, self._schema) File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/table.py", line 2272, in table_cast return cast_table_to_schema(table, schema) File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/table.py", line 2218, in cast_table_to_schema raise CastError( datasets.table.CastError: Couldn't cast bos_token_id: int64 do_sample: bool eos_token_id: list<item: int64> child 0, item: int64 max_length: int64 pad_token_id: int64 temperature: double top_p: double transformers_version: string to {'instruction': Value('string'), 'output': Value('string'), 'input': Value('string')} because column names don't match During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/src/services/worker/src/worker/job_runners/config/parquet_and_info.py", line 1451, in compute_config_parquet_and_info_response parquet_operations, partial, estimated_dataset_info = stream_convert_to_parquet( File "/src/services/worker/src/worker/job_runners/config/parquet_and_info.py", line 994, in stream_convert_to_parquet builder._prepare_split( File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/builder.py", line 1702, in _prepare_split for job_id, done, content in self._prepare_split_single( File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/builder.py", line 1833, in _prepare_split_single raise DatasetGenerationCastError.from_cast_error( datasets.exceptions.DatasetGenerationCastError: An error occurred while generating the dataset All the data files must have the same columns, but at some point there are 8 new columns ({'eos_token_id', 'do_sample', 'temperature', 'top_p', 'pad_token_id', 'bos_token_id', 'transformers_version', 'max_length'}) and 3 missing columns ({'instruction', 'output', 'input'}). This happened while the json dataset builder was generating data using hf://datasets/efe1903/NEW_TRAINING01/generation_config.json (at revision 22abb54ec5c96853569eded6b5f03c2f5fcb16fa) Please either edit the data files to have matching columns, or separate them into different configurations (see docs at https://hf.co/docs/hub/datasets-manual-configuration#multiple-configurations)
Need help to make the dataset viewer work? Make sure to review how to configure the dataset viewer, and open a discussion for direct support.
instruction
string | output
string | input
string |
---|---|---|
Perform technical analysis
|
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS: BTC shows Diamond pattern. RSI at 80 (Overbought - Potential pullback). MACD: neutral. Price vs MA: Strong downtrend. Volume: decreasing. Signal: HOLD. Confidence: 81%. Target: $36710.45, Stop: $32971.43.
|
BTC at $33991.16, RSI: 80, MACD: neutral, MA50: $34578.83, MA200: $36780.68
|
Analyze Point of Control (POC)
|
POINT OF CONTROL: POC at $30395.69 with 6.7M volume over 86h. Current: $24626.42 (19.0% away). Market bias: BEARISH - Below POC. POC strength: WEAK. Strategy: Short rallies to POC. Target: Next support below. Probability of POC test: 62%. Key level: POC acts as resistance.
|
POC: $30395.69, Current: $24626.42, Volume at POC: 6.7M, Time: 86h
|
Analyze UNI trading strategy in Bull market at $48358
|
TRADING ANALYSIS for UNI | Market: Bull, Price: $48,358. Strategy: Ride the trend. Risk Level: High. Expected Return: 10%. Time Frame: 1W.
| null |
Implement Scalping strategy with $63283 capital and 1.9% risk
|
STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION: Scalping | Capital: $63,283, Risk: 1.9%. Position Size: $1200 per trade. Stop Loss: 4%. Take Profit: 10%. Expected Trades: 42 per month.
| null |
RSI: 54, Volume: Normal. What's your decision?
|
DECISION ANALYSIS | RSI: 54 (Neutral), Volume: Normal. DECISION: Hold. Reasoning: Market uncertainty. Confidence: 66%.
| null |
Process and accept trading loss
|
LOSS ACCEPTANCE: -17% loss from wrong_direction. Current emotion: frustrated. Reframe: Part of probability - not every trade wins. Key lesson: Review analysis but accept uncertainty. Required action: Take mandatory 2-hour break minimum. Acceptance mantra: 'Losses are tuition for market education.' Statistical context: This size loss occurs 27% of the time in your system. Recovery approach: No revenge trades. Next trade mindset: Clean slate, full focus.
|
Loss: -17%, Type: wrong_direction, Emotional response: frustrated
|
Perform on-chain analysis
|
ON-CHAIN ANALYSIS: ETH network activity - 303k active addresses (-6.6% vs 30d avg). Daily transactions: 235k. Gas fees: 134 Gwei. Exchange balance: -2.3% change. Long-term holders: -3.4% change. Signal: BEARISH - HODLers selling. Network health: Normal. Miner/Validator sentiment: Positive.
|
ETH Active addresses: 303k, Transactions: 235k
|
RSI: 34, Volume: Low. What's your decision?
|
DECISION ANALYSIS | RSI: 34, Volume: Low. DECISION: Sell. Reasoning and confidence level provided.
| null |
Perform technical analysis
|
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS: ETH shows Triple Bottom pattern. RSI at 47 (Neutral zone). MACD: neutral. Price vs MA: Trend transition. Volume: increasing. Signal: HOLD. Confidence: 73%. Target: $2346.14, Stop: $2107.18.
|
ETH at $2172.35, RSI: 47, MACD: neutral, MA50: $2241.10, MA200: $2097.41
|
Cold start sonrası cache warming?
|
🔥 CACHE WARMING
• Phase 1: Critical data (6s)
- Top 100 tokens
- Active trading pairs
• Phase 2: Secondary (19s)
- Historical data
- Order books
• Phase 3: Predictive (51s)
- ML-based prefetch
- User patterns
• Progress: ████████░░ 80%
• ETA: 50s
|
Cache status: Empty, Critical endpoints: 18, Warm-up time budget: 96s
|
Assess current liquidity conditions
|
LIQUIDITY CYCLE: 02:00 UTC weekday. Active exchanges: 10/10. Liquidity: MODERATE. Best strategy now: Normal trading. Market maker activity: 40%.
|
Time: 02:00 UTC on weekday, 10 major exchanges active
|
Analyze DOT trading strategy in Sideways market at $45238
|
TRADING ANALYSIS for DOT | Market: Sideways, Price: $45,238. Strategy: Range trading. Risk Level: High. Expected Return: 44%. Time Frame: 1M.
| null |
Check calendar impact on trading
|
CALENDAR ALERT: Options Friday coming in 0 days. Impact level: LOW. Action: NORMAL TRADING. Historical volatility during Options Friday: 36%. Prepare: Tighten stops.
|
Event: Options Friday in 0 days, expected impact: low
|
Detect iceberg orders
|
ICEBERG DETECTION: Order at $10012.08 showing 49406 units. Refill pattern: random_refill. Time at level: 7 min. Detection: REGULAR ORDER. Estimated real size: 49406 units (wysiwyg). Confidence: 90%. Strategy: Trade normally. Market impact: Temporary level. Execution advice: Can trade through.
|
Visible: 49406 units at $10012.08, Pattern: random_refill, Time: 7 min
|
Retrieve from extended memory
|
📚 MEMORY RETRIEVAL: Accessing correlation_matrix. Query: optimization. Results: Correlation matrix shows 17 significant relationships above 82% threshold. Relevance: 82% match. Memory confidence: 87%. Data age: 114 days old. Recommendation: Apply to current decision. Memory integration: Partial weight.
|
Memory type: correlation_matrix, Query: optimization, Relevance threshold: 82%
|
Check calendar impact on trading
|
CALENDAR ALERT: Thanksgiving coming in 5 days. Impact level: HIGH. Action: NORMAL TRADING. Historical volatility during Thanksgiving: +169%. Prepare: Hedge positions.
|
Event: Thanksgiving in 5 days, expected impact: high
|
Analyze current market conditions
|
MARKET ANALYSIS: ATOM at $12.27 (-13.0% 24h). Market Status: Strong Bearish. Volume: $2.06B (High). Dominance: 11.3%. Action: Avoid longs, consider shorts. Support: $11.66, Resistance: $12.89. Trend: Downtrend.
|
ATOM Price: $12.27, 24h: -13.0%, Volume: $2.06B, Rank: #23
|
Decision tree scenario: position_sizing_tree
|
🌲 **Decision Tree: position_sizing_tree**
**Level 1: Initial Assessment**
├─ Signal Detection: ✓
├─ Risk Assessment: 10/10
└─ Confidence: 86%
**Level 2: Decision Branch**
❌ Conditions Not Met → WAIT
• Action: Set alerts
• Review in: 12 hours
| null |
Run simulation before live trading
|
SIMULATION COMPLETE: paper_trade over 143 days. Results: +83.09% profit | Max DD: -39.84% | Sharpe: 1.41. Trades simulated: 678 in choppy market. Assessment: NEEDS IMPROVEMENT. Recommendation: Optimize and re-test. Issues found: Excessive drawdown. Confidence in results: 64%. Next step: Fix issues and re-simulate.
|
Simulation: paper_trade, Duration: 143 days, Trades: 678, Market: choppy
|
Perform on-chain analysis
|
ON-CHAIN ANALYSIS: ETH network activity - 333k active addresses (+17.3% vs 30d avg). Daily transactions: 485k. Gas fees: 12 Gwei. Exchange balance: +5.2% change. Long-term holders: +4.9% change. Signal: BEARISH - Coins entering exchanges. Network health: Normal. Miner/Validator sentiment: Negative.
|
ETH Active addresses: 333k, Transactions: 485k
|
Adjust learning rate for new information
|
LEARNING RATE: Set to 0.01 for critical data. Reliability: 97% | Recency: 1 day old | Current knowledge: 50% confident. Integration method: Track but do not integrate. Validation required: Test on 49 paper trades before full adoption. Memory weight: New 0% vs Old 100%.
|
Data importance: critical, Reliability: 97%, Recency: 1 day old, Current confidence: 50%
|
Analyze depth risks
|
ORDER BOOK DEPTH for ETH/USDT | Depth: $6192058 across 384 orders. Analysis at 2% from mid: $2476823 buy side, $3715235 sell side. Your $39321 order: Sufficient depth. Coinbase depth characteristics: Real orders vs spoofing detection important. Depth chart reading: Look for walls (support/resistance), gaps (slippage zones), imbalances (direction bias). Deep book benefits: Better pricing, less manipulation, institutional friendly.
|
{"concept": "Depth", "pair": "ETH/USDT", "liquidity": "$6192058", "trade_size": "$39321", "exchange": "Coinbase"}
|
Arbitrage opportunity: options_arb
|
**Arbitrage Analysis: options_arb**
Checking arbitrage opportunities.
• Spread: 0.94%
• Profitability: No
• Risk Level: Medium
| null |
Generate risk warning
|
⚠️ RISK WARNING: CRITICAL - news event risk this week. Details: Major announcement in this week. REQUIRED ACTION: EXIT ALL POSITIONS IMMEDIATELY. Potential impact: 13% portfolio volatility. Safe haven: USDT/USDC. Duration: 14 hours expected.
|
Warning type: news event, Severity: CRITICAL, Timeline: this week
|
SOL/1d grafiğinde formation tespiti yap. Mevcut fiyat: $11,993.44. Son 50 mum verisi mevcut.
|
📊 FORMASİYON TESPİTİ
🎯 Bulunan Pattern: Double Bottom
• Timeframe: 1d
• Güvenilirlik: 85%
• Pattern tamamlanma: %86
🔄 DOUBLE BOTTOM ANALİZİ
• İlk dip: $11393.77
• İkinci dip: $11405.16
• Neckline: $12353.24
• Hedef: $13312.72
✅ Onay: Neckline kırılımı + Volume artışı
| null |
Calculate volatility-adjusted position size
|
VOLATILITY SIZING: Current 54% vs baseline 42%. Adjustment ratio: 0.78x. Base position: 4% → Adjusted: 3.1%. Dollar amount: $26,160. Rule applied: ELEVATED VOL - Moderate reduction. Risk per trade: $523 (2% of position). Max loss if stopped: $14,127. Kelly criterion suggests: 1% optimal.
|
Current vol: 54%, Baseline: 42%, Account: $840873, Base size: 4%
|
Analyze market microstructure
|
MICROSTRUCTURE: 460 ticks/sec | Spread 0.924% | Depth imbalance -48.4% | Quote stuffing: YES. Market structure: WIDE SPREAD. Trading environment: Poor liquidity. Recommended strategy: Use limit orders only. Edge assessment: Costly to trade. Optimal order type: Limit. Execution timing: Off-peak preferred.
|
Ticks/sec: 460, Spread: 0.924%, Depth imbalance: -48.4%, Quote stuffing: True
|
Implement Scalping strategy with $31781 capital and 2.5% risk
|
STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION: Scalping | Capital: $31,781, Risk: 2.5%. Position Size: $794 per trade. Stop Loss: 7%. Take Profit: 26%. Expected Trades: 28 per month.
| null |
Analyze completed trade
|
POST-TRADE ANALYSIS: DOGE profit -12.17% in 49 weeks. Entry: good | Exit: early | Risk: poor. Key lesson: Small win, consider if risk/reward was worth it. Improvements needed: Better entry timing, Exit strategy optimization, Risk management enhancement. Grade: B. Add to playbook: No.
|
Trade: DOGE, Result: profit -12.17%, Duration: 49 weeks
|
Perform technical analysis
|
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS: BTC shows Diamond pattern. RSI at 31 (Neutral zone). MACD: bullish cross. Price vs MA: Trend transition. Volume: increasing. Signal: BUY. Confidence: 67%. Target: $51814.60, Stop: $46537.19.
|
BTC at $47976.49, RSI: 31, MACD: bullish_cross, MA50: $46487.02, MA200: $48740.65
|
Assess risk management
|
RISK ASSESSMENT: Account $1,000 with 2.0252720919679925% risk per trade = $20 position size. Current exposure: 19.7% across 8 positions. Risk Level: LOW - Can increase. Drawdown: 10.3% of 19.5% max. Available margin: $803. Max new positions: 14. Kelly Criterion suggests: 1.8% optimal.
|
Account: $1000, Risk/trade: 2.0252720919679925%, Positions: 8, Exposure: 19.678466596494783%
|
Score strategy effectiveness
|
STRATEGY SCORE: Volume_Profile in crab market. Metrics: Win 79% | PF 1.55 | Sharpe 0.58 | Sample 551. Grade: B GOOD. Action: Use 75% position size. Statistical confidence: HIGH. Recommendation: Continue and scale.
|
Strategy: Volume_Profile, Win rate: 79%, Profit factor: 1.55, Sharpe: 0.58, Trades: 551, Market: crab
|
Find arbitrage opportunity
|
ARBITRAGE SCAN: CROSS EXCHANGE opportunity. ATOM price gap: 0.724% between Bybit ($8.97) and OKX ($8.90). Total fees: 0.14%. Net profit: 0.484%. Status: MARGINAL PROFIT. Action: Only worth with large volume. Execution time: ~34 seconds. Volume limit: $384176. Risk: Moderate risk.
|
ATOM on Bybit: $8.97, OKX: $8.90, Type: cross_exchange
|
Implement HODL strategy with $60620 capital and 1.2% risk
|
COGNITIVE STRATEGY: HODL | Capital: $60,620, Risk: 1.2%. Detailed implementation plan with entry/exit rules.
| null |
Implement HODL strategy with $76008 capital and 4.1% risk
|
COGNITIVE STRATEGY: HODL | Capital: $76,008, Risk: 4.1%. Detailed implementation plan with entry/exit rules.
| null |
Detect overconfidence
|
EUPHORIA WARNING: 11 consecutive wins, +84% week. Overconfidence score: 10/10. Historical outcome after such streaks: 76% give back within days. Action: REDUCE all positions 50%, lock in profits, lower leverage to 1x maximum.
|
Won 11 trades straight, up +84% this week
|
Analyze current market conditions
|
MARKET ANALYSIS: BNB at $249.19 (-16.8% 24h). Market Status: Strong Bearish. Volume: $1.58B (Normal). Dominance: 18.5%. Action: Avoid longs, consider shorts. Support: $236.73, Resistance: $261.65. Trend: Downtrend.
|
BNB Price: $249.19, 24h: -16.8%, Volume: $1.58B, Rank: #13
|
Analyze SOL trading strategy in Sideways market at $42620
|
FOUNDATION ANALYSIS for SOL | Market: Sideways, Price: $42,620. Strategy recommendation based on market conditions and technical analysis.
| null |
Track version deployment
|
VERSION CONTROL: v1.15.942 (hotfix). Changes: 43 files modified. Test coverage: 93%. Deploy status: FAST TRACK DEPLOY. Action: Deploy immediately with monitoring. Risk level: HIGH. Rollback plan: Automatic rollback ready. Changelog: Hotfix - Performance improved 20%. Next version ETA: 11 days.
|
Version: v1.15.942, Type: hotfix, Changes: 43 files, Test coverage: 93%
|
Perform technical analysis
|
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS: MATIC shows Descending Triangle pattern. RSI at 39 (Neutral zone). MACD: bearish cross. Price vs MA: Strong downtrend. Volume: decreasing. Signal: HOLD. Confidence: 85%. Target: $1.22, Stop: $1.10.
|
MATIC at $1.13, RSI: 39, MACD: bearish_cross, MA50: $1.16, MA200: $1.23
|
Determine if double confirmation needed
|
DOUBLE CONFIRMATION: Trade $18,772 (1% of account). Requirement: SINGLE CONFIRMATION. Checks: Review and confirm. Forced wait: 10 seconds. Risk level: high | Market: volatile. Confirmation checklist: ☐ Amount correct ☐ Direction right ☐ Stop loss set ☐ Risk acceptable. Override possible: Yes with reason. Safety score: 79/100. Rule: Trades >1% of account always need confirmation.
|
Trade size: $18772, Account %: 1%, Risk: high, Market: volatile
|
Integration test results?
|
✅ INTEGRATION TESTS
• Results:
- Passed: 464/471
- Failed: 11
- Skipped: 10
• Coverage:
- Unit: 96%
- Integration: 79%
- E2E: 62%
• Performance: Improved
• Next run: 18h
|
Test suites: 212, Pass rate: 100%, Coverage: 95%
|
RSI: 46, Volume: Normal. What's your decision?
|
DECISION ANALYSIS | RSI: 46 (Neutral), Volume: Normal. DECISION: Sell. Reasoning: Risk management. Confidence: 70%.
| null |
Perform on-chain analysis
|
ON-CHAIN ANALYSIS: BTC network activity - 578k active addresses (-26.4% vs 30d avg). Daily transactions: 220k. Hash rate: +29.8%. Exchange balance: -8.3% change. Long-term holders: +0.9% change. Signal: BULLISH - Coins leaving exchanges. Network health: Strong. Miner/Validator sentiment: Positive.
|
BTC Active addresses: 578k, Transactions: 220k
|
India announces Tax regulation change. What are the implications for crypto investors?
|
⚖️ **Regulatory Impact Analysis**
**Event:** India Tax regulation change
**Date:** 2025-08-08
**Severity:** HIGH
**Immediate Implications:**
1. **Market Impact:**
• Expected price movement: -27% initial drop
• Affected tokens: Specific segments
• Trading volume: Spike due to panic selling
2. **Investor Actions Required:**
• Review portfolio exposure to India
• Consider geographic diversification
• Evaluate compliance requirements
• Assess tax implications
3. **Long-term Outlook:**
• Regulatory clarity: Improved
• Innovation impact: Redirected
• Market maturation: Delayed
**Risk Mitigation Strategies:**
• Diversify across jurisdictions
• Maintain compliance documentation
• Use regulated exchanges
• Consider DeFi alternatives
• Keep updated on regulatory changes
| null |
Execute meta-learning optimization loop
|
META-LEARNING LOOP #216: Testing v3.8.1. Status: IMPROVING SLOWLY. Last cycle: +2.07% change. Convergence rate: 0.713. Action: Try larger parameter changes. Estimated iterations to optimum: 14. Parameters to test: 20. Next test: Threshold adjustment.
|
Iteration: 216, Version: v3.8.1, Last improvement: 2.07%, Convergence rate: 0.713
|
RSI: 41, Volume: Normal. What's your decision?
|
DECISION ANALYSIS | RSI: 41 (Neutral), Volume: Normal. DECISION: Sell. Reasoning: Risk management. Confidence: 77%.
| null |
Analyze SOL trading strategy in Volatile market at $46624
|
TRADING ANALYSIS for SOL | Market: Volatile, Price: $46,624. Strategy: Range trading. Risk Level: High. Expected Return: 14%. Time Frame: 1D.
| null |
Assess current liquidity conditions
|
LIQUIDITY CYCLE: 14:00 UTC holiday. Active exchanges: 1/10. Liquidity: LOW - wide spreads. Best strategy now: Small size only. Market maker activity: 66%.
|
Time: 14:00 UTC on holiday, 1 major exchanges active
|
Check if strategy adaptation needed
|
ADAPTATION TRIGGER: URGENT ADAPTATION REQUIRED. Performance: 18% | Losses: 13 consecutive | Age: 218 days. Root cause: Possible strategy decay. Urgency: CRITICAL. Action: Stop current strategy immediately. Next review in: 1 days.
|
Performance change: 18%, Consecutive losses: 13, Strategy age: 218 days, Market change: volatility doubled
|
Assess risk management
|
RISK ASSESSMENT: Account $500,000 with 1.5777993471917604% risk per trade = $7,889 position size. Current exposure: 4.2% across 6 positions. Risk Level: LOW - Can increase. Drawdown: 5.4% of 10.5% max. Available margin: $479,112. Max new positions: 29. Kelly Criterion suggests: 1.8% optimal.
|
Account: $500000, Risk/trade: 1.5777993471917604%, Positions: 6, Exposure: 4.177563144928643%
|
Assess risk management
|
RISK ASSESSMENT: Account $5,000 with 1.9403483152042764% risk per trade = $97 position size. Current exposure: 19.7% across 2 positions. Risk Level: LOW - Can increase. Drawdown: 6.0% of 29.5% max. Available margin: $4,017. Max new positions: 15. Kelly Criterion suggests: 1.9% optimal.
|
Account: $5000, Risk/trade: 1.9403483152042764%, Positions: 2, Exposure: 19.65613048690922%
|
Analyze this recurring pattern
|
PATTERN MEMORY: head_shoulders on SEI at $0.9191. Historical success rate: 57% in crab conditions. Occurrences: 22. Confidence: MEDIUM. Action: WAIT FOR CONFIRMATION
|
SEI: head_shoulders pattern at $0.9191, seen 22 times in crab market
|
Retrieve from extended memory
|
📚 MEMORY RETRIEVAL: Accessing correlation_matrix. Query: risk_event. Results: Correlation matrix shows 17 significant relationships above 78% threshold. Relevance: 78% match. Memory confidence: 84%. Data age: 128 days old. Recommendation: Consider as reference only. Memory integration: Partial weight.
|
Memory type: correlation_matrix, Query: risk_event, Relevance threshold: 78%
|
Check for fat finger errors
|
FAT FINGER PROTECTION: Intended 107 UNI → Entered 1.07 UNI. Detection: SIZE DEVIATION. Severity: MEDIUM. Action: Yellow warning - Check amount. Potential impact: $4,118,876 opportunity cost. Safeguards: Max single order: 214 UNI. Require confirmation if >160.5. Protection rules: Amounts 2x normal require double confirmation. Auto-correction: No - proceed as entered.
|
Intended: 107 UNI, Entered: 1.07 UNI, Price: $38883
|
Spot $50000, Futures $49897, Funding 0.125%. Arbitrage?
|
📊 **Spot-Futures Arbitrage Analysis**
**Market Prices:**
• Spot Price: $50,000
• Futures Price: $49,897
• Premium/Discount: $-103
• Funding Rate: 0.125% per 8h
❌ **NO SIGNIFICANT ARBITRAGE**
• Spread too small
| null |
Analyze SOL trading strategy in Bull market at $47260
|
FOUNDATION ANALYSIS for SOL | Market: Bull, Price: $47,260. Strategy recommendation based on market conditions and technical analysis.
| null |
Security audit checklist for protecting against wallet drainer attacks
|
📋 **Security Audit Checklist: Wallet Drainer Protection**
**Audit Date:** 2025-08-08
**Risk Area:** wallet drainer
**Personal Security Audit:**
**Passwords & Authentication:**
☐ Unique passwords for each platform
☐ Password manager in use
☐ 2FA enabled everywhere possible
☐ Hardware keys for critical accounts
☐ Recovery codes backed up securely
**Wallet Security:**
☐ Hardware wallet for main holdings
☐ Seed phrase securely stored offline
☐ Never typed seed phrase online
☐ Multiple wallets for different purposes
☐ Regular permission audits
**Communication Channels:**
☐ Privacy settings maximized
☐ DMs restricted or disabled
☐ Official channels verified
☐ Suspicious messages reported
☐ No personal info in profiles
**Transaction Habits:**
☐ Always verify addresses
☐ Test transactions first
☐ Check gas fees for anomalies
☐ Review approvals before signing
☐ Use transaction simulation tools
**Knowledge & Awareness:**
☐ Familiar with common scams
☐ Follow security news
☐ Part of security communities
☐ Regular security training
☐ Incident response plan ready
**Score:** 13/20 items checked
**Risk Level:** Medium
**Next Audit:** 2025-09-07
**Priority Improvements:**
1. Enable 2FA on remaining accounts
2. Update incident response plan
3. Review privacy settings
| null |
Analyze market psychology
|
MARKET PSYCHOLOGY: Fear & Greed Index at 25/100. FEAR - Accumulation zone. Social sentiment: neutral. Retail traders: long. Whale activity: inactive. Funding rate: 0.289% (Longs paying). Contrarian signal: NEUTRAL. Market phase: Accumulation.
|
Fear&Greed: 25, Social: neutral, Retail: long, Funding: 0.289%
|
RSI: 29, Volume: Normal. What's your decision?
|
DECISION ANALYSIS | RSI: 29 (Oversold), Volume: Normal. DECISION: Hold. Reasoning: Market uncertainty. Confidence: 65%.
| null |
Execute rollback if needed
|
ROLLBACK ASSESSMENT: Issue: wrong_parameters in v4.5.91. Decision: FIX OR ROLLBACK. Urgency: MEDIUM. Rollback to: v3.8.95. Expected downtime: 12 minutes. Data loss risk: LOW. Steps: 1) Stop trading 2) Backup current state 3) Rollback code 4) Verify integrity 5) Resume with v3.8.95. Post-rollback: Investigate root cause. Alternative: Hot fix possible.
|
Current: v4.5.91, Previous: v3.8.95, Issue: wrong_parameters, Deployed: 18 hours ago
|
Implement HODL strategy with $38134 capital and 2.2% risk
|
COGNITIVE STRATEGY: HODL | Capital: $38,134, Risk: 2.2%. Detailed implementation plan with entry/exit rules.
| null |
Analyze BTC trading strategy in Bear market at $21391
|
TRADING ANALYSIS for BTC | Market: Bear, Price: $21,391. Strategy: Buy the dip. Risk Level: Medium. Expected Return: 22%. Time Frame: 1W.
| null |
Integration test results?
|
✅ INTEGRATION TESTS
• Results:
- Passed: 405/473
- Failed: 4
- Skipped: 10
• Coverage:
- Unit: 99%
- Integration: 73%
- E2E: 62%
• Performance: Degraded
• Next run: 21h
|
Test suites: 177, Pass rate: 90%, Coverage: 83%
|
RSI: 35, Whale activity: neutral, News: bullish. What's your trading decision?
|
🎯 **Multi-Criteria Trading Decision**
**Data Analysis:**
• RSI: 35 - Neutral
• Whale Activity: Neutral
• News Sentiment: Bullish
**Signal Weighting:**
• RSI Signal: 0 (Weight: 30%)
• Whale Signal: 0 (Weight: 40%)
• News Signal: + (Weight: 30%)
**Composite Score:** 0.30
**Decision:** **HOLD/WAIT** 🟡
• Insufficient confluence
• Wait for clearer signals
• Monitor for breakout/breakdown
**Reasoning:**
Signals align bullishly with 30.0% confidence
| null |
Learn from peer traders
|
PEER LEARNING: Source: algo_community teaching risk_management. Credibility: 61%. Trust assessment: LOW - Limited proof. Action: Research thoroughly. Key insight: New technique: Order flow. Integration approach: Paper trade 50+ times. Value: LOW - Note but verify.
|
Source: algo_community, Learning: risk_management, Credibility: 61%
|
Analyze on-chain activity
|
ON-CHAIN FORENSICS: exchange wallet with 992 transactions showing normal pattern. Alert: NORMAL ACTIVITY. Action: Continue monitoring. Confidence: 50%. Historical correlation with price: 52%. Time lag: 12h typically.
|
Wallet type: exchange, Transactions: 992, Pattern: normal
|
Implement DCA strategy with $34905 capital and 1.3% risk
|
COGNITIVE STRATEGY: DCA | Capital: $34,905, Risk: 1.3%. Detailed implementation plan with entry/exit rules.
| null |
Optimize portfolio using Rebalancing
|
REBALANCING PROTOCOL for $976113 | Frequency for 1 month: Monthly. Threshold method: Rebalance when any asset deviates >20% from target. 10 assets makes: ~$4881 estimated gas/trading costs. Moderate approach: 20% deviation. Tax consideration: Use new deposits to rebalance first. Backtest shows: 15-20% better risk-adjusted returns with discipline.
|
{"strategy": "Rebalancing", "portfolio_value": "$976113", "num_assets": 10, "risk_tolerance": "Moderate", "time_horizon": "1 month"}
|
Generate risk warning
|
⚠️ RISK WARNING: CRITICAL - news event risk 1 hour. Details: Major announcement in 1 hour. REQUIRED ACTION: EXIT ALL POSITIONS IMMEDIATELY. Potential impact: 5% portfolio volatility. Safe haven: USDT/USDC. Duration: 34 hours expected.
|
Warning type: news event, Severity: CRITICAL, Timeline: 1 hour
|
Analyze correlation breakdown
|
CORRELATION BREAKDOWN: BNB-AVAX correlation shifted from 79% to -21% due to fundamental_change. Status: MAJOR BREAKDOWN. Action: Trade the divergence. Opportunity: High probability mean reversion. Expected reversion time: 60 hours. Historical accuracy: 79%.
|
BNB-AVAX normal: 79%, current: -21%, trigger: fundamental_change
|
Analyze this backtest result and provide detailed performance report:
Strategy: grid_trading
Backtest Period: 3 months
Initial Capital: $5,000
Trading Results:
- Total Trades: 736
- Winning Trades: 375
- Losing Trades: 361
- Average Win: 2.49%
- Average Loss: 1.13%
Provide comprehensive analysis with improvement suggestions.
|
## Backtest Performance Analysis - Grid Trading
### Executive Summary
Period: 3 months | Initial Capital: $5,000 | Final Capital: $31,440.94
### Performance Metrics
**Profitability:**
- Total Return: $26,440.94 (+528.82%)
- Win Rate: 50.95%
- Profit Factor: 2.30
- Average Win/Loss Ratio: 2.22
**Risk Metrics:**
- Maximum Drawdown: 12.21%
- Sharpe Ratio: 0.928
- Calmar Ratio: 43.311
- Risk/Reward Ratio: 1:2.22
### Trade Analysis
**Distribution:**
- Total Trades: 736
- Winning Trades: 375 (51.0%)
- Losing Trades: 361 (49.0%)
- Average Trade Duration: 1.2 days
**Performance by Period:**
- Best Month: 19.9% return
- Worst Month: -6.9% return
- Consecutive Wins (Max): 8
- Consecutive Losses (Max): 6
### Strategy Evaluation
**Strengths:**
✅ Good profit factor of 2.30
✅ Manageable drawdowns
✅ Scalable strategy with high trade frequency
**Weaknesses:**
⚠️ Room for risk optimization
⚠️ Consider position sizing optimization
### Statistical Significance
**Monte Carlo Simulation Results (1000 runs):**
- 95% Confidence Interval: [370.17%, 687.46%]
- Probability of Profit: 75.5%
- Expected Maximum Drawdown: 14.65%
- Risk of Ruin (50% capital loss): 2.84%
### Optimization Recommendations
1. **Entry Optimization:**
- Consider scaling into positions
- Add spread thresholds
2. **Exit Strategy:**
- Dynamic profit targets
- Current R:R of 1:2.22 is good, maintain
3. **Risk Management:**
- Reduce position size by 13% during high volatility
- Implement daily loss limit at 3.7% of capital
- Consider portfolio heat: max 2% risk across all positions
4. **Market Conditions:**
- Strategy performs best in volatile conditions
- Avoid low liquidity periods
### Forward Testing Recommendations
Before live deployment:
1. Paper trade for minimum 1 month
2. Start with 12% of intended position size
3. Monitor slippage vs backtest assumptions
4. Track execution quality metrics
5. Validate risk parameters in real market conditions
| null |
Analyze Value Area (VA)
|
VALUE AREA: VAH $99532.65 | VAL $82835.86 | Current $95538.74. Position: INSIDE VALUE. 71% of volume traded in VA. Width: 20.2%. Market bias: Neutral - In balance. Strategy: Trade VA edges. Risk assessment: Higher - choppy action. Edge trades: Short at VAH. Breakout target: 104509.28 above, 78694.07 below.
|
VAH: $99532.65, VAL: $82835.86, Current: $95538.74, Volume in VA: 71%
|
Analyze LINK trading strategy in Bull market at $45781
|
TRADING ANALYSIS for LINK | Market: Bull, Price: $45,781. Strategy: Ride the trend. Risk Level: High. Expected Return: 47%. Time Frame: 1W.
| null |
Check calendar impact on trading
|
CALENDAR ALERT: Golden Week coming in 1 days. Impact level: LOW. Action: NORMAL TRADING. Historical volatility during Golden Week: 77%. Prepare: Tighten stops.
|
Event: Golden Week in 1 days, expected impact: low
|
Analyze volume and liquidity
|
VOLUME & LIQUIDITY: OP 24h volume $1.73B (+52.4% change). Liquidity status: GOOD - Liquid. Bid-ask spread: 0.108% (Normal). Order book depth: $3.1M within 2%. Large orders (>$100k): 19. Volume profile: Increasing interest. Slippage estimate for $1M: 0.34%. Best trading times: Avoid large orders.
|
OP Volume: $1.73B, Change: 52.4%, Spread: 0.108%
|
Implement DCA strategy with $65412 capital and 3.9% risk
|
STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION: DCA | Capital: $65,412, Risk: 3.9%. Position Size: $2576 per trade. Stop Loss: 6%. Take Profit: 14%. Expected Trades: 32 per month.
| null |
Execute meta-learning optimization loop
|
META-LEARNING LOOP #770: Testing v4.3.38. Status: IMPROVING RAPIDLY. Last cycle: +12.54% change. Convergence rate: 0.015. Action: Continue current direction. Estimated iterations to optimum: 100. Parameters to test: 12. Next test: Hyperparameter tuning.
|
Iteration: 770, Version: v4.3.38, Last improvement: 12.54%, Convergence rate: 0.015
|
Analyze BTC trading strategy in Sideways market at $48705
|
FOUNDATION ANALYSIS for BTC | Market: Sideways, Price: $48,705. Strategy recommendation based on market conditions and technical analysis.
| null |
BTC için mikro zaman diliminde pattern analizi yap. Son 10 tick: ['$22340.33', '$22341.10', '$22340.53', '$22340.57', '$22340.65', '$22341.12', '$22340.79', '$22340.39', '$22340.29', '$22340.57']. Volume artışı: 150%
|
⚡ HIGH-FREQUENCY ANALİZ
🔍 Tespit Edilen Pattern: SPOOFING_DETECTED
• Süre: 1-2 seconds
• Volume spike: 150%
🚫 MANİPÜLASYON TESPİT EDİLDİ
• Spoofing emirleri görüldü
• Fake volume detected
• ÖNERİ: İşlem yapma, bekle
• Gerçek likidite bekleniyor
| null |
Analyze ETH trading strategy in Bear market at $34048
|
TRADING ANALYSIS for ETH | Market: Bear, Price: $34,048. Strategy: Buy the dip. Risk Level: High. Expected Return: 21%. Time Frame: 1M.
| null |
Evaluate trading strategy
|
STRATEGY ANALYSIS: Day Trading on SOL (1h). Market condition: volatile. Strategy fit: SUBOPTIMAL. Expected win rate: 57% with 1.2:1 R:R. Profit expectancy: 0.27. Recommended position size: 3% per trade. Entry rules: Technical signals. Max daily trades: 5.
|
Strategy: Day Trading, Coin: SOL, Timeframe: 1h, Market: volatile
|
Implement Grid Trading strategy with $94829 capital and 4.3% risk
|
STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION: Grid Trading | Capital: $94,829, Risk: 4.3%. Position Size: $4082 per trade. Stop Loss: 8%. Take Profit: 25%. Expected Trades: 20 per month.
| null |
Check correlation patterns
|
CORRELATION MEMORY: OP +13% → MATIC follows 91% of time with 10hr lag. Average follow move: +9.1%. Setup MATIC entry for expected move.
|
OP moved +13%, what happens to MATIC
|
Perform technical analysis
|
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS: DOT shows Ascending Triangle pattern. RSI at 58 (Neutral zone). MACD: bullish cross. Price vs MA: Strong uptrend. Volume: stable. Signal: HOLD. Confidence: 94%. Target: $5.10, Stop: $4.58.
|
DOT at $4.73, RSI: 58, MACD: bullish_cross, MA50: $4.70, MA200: $4.55
|
Analyze market psychology
|
MARKET PSYCHOLOGY: Fear & Greed Index at 30/100. FEAR - Accumulation zone. Social sentiment: extreme bearish. Retail traders: heavily long. Whale activity: accumulating. Funding rate: -0.064% (Shorts paying). Contrarian signal: NEUTRAL. Market phase: Transition.
|
Fear&Greed: 30, Social: extreme_bearish, Retail: heavily_long, Funding: -0.064%
|
Arbitrage opportunity: triangular_arb
|
**Arbitrage Analysis: triangular_arb**
Checking arbitrage opportunities.
• Spread: 0.12%
• Profitability: No
• Risk Level: Low
| null |
Analyze LINK trading strategy in Volatile market at $1011
|
TRADING ANALYSIS for LINK | Market: Volatile, Price: $1,011. Strategy: Range trading. Risk Level: High. Expected Return: 36%. Time Frame: 1W.
| null |
Analyze on-chain activity
|
ON-CHAIN FORENSICS: smart_money wallet with 213 transactions showing suspicious pattern. Alert: HIGH RISK ALERT. Action: Exit positions. Confidence: 90%. Historical correlation with price: 73%. Time lag: 44h typically.
|
Wallet type: smart_money, Transactions: 213, Pattern: suspicious
|
Manage execution slippage
|
SLIPPAGE ANALYSIS: Expected $32927 → Actual $31946.79. Slippage: 2.977% ($980.21). Assessment: EXCESSIVE SLIPPAGE. Market depth: moderate | Order: whale. Context: As expected for conditions. Action: Review execution venue/method. Improvement: Use iceberg orders. Cost impact: $32347 on full position. Acceptable range: <1.0%.
|
Expected: $32927, Actual: $31946.79, Volume: moderate, Order size: whale
|
API endpoint çökerse failover mekanizması nasıl çalışmalı?
|
🔧 FAILOVER MEKANİZMASI - API ENDPOINT
**Primary System Status:**
• System: API endpoint
• Uptime SLA: 99.25%
• Current status: DOWN
• Last heartbeat: 200 saniye önce
**Failover Architecture:**
```
Primary API endpoint
↓ (Health check every 5s)
Monitor detects failure
↓ (Trigger time: 930ms)
Activate secondary system
↓ (Switchover: 2740ms)
Sync state & resume
```
**Backup Sistemler:**
1. **Secondary:** AWS - Warm standby
2. **Tertiary:** On-premise - Cold standby
3. **Emergency:** Read-only cache
**Failover Triggers:**
• Response time > 1996ms
• Error rate > 2%
• Connection timeouts > 8/min
• Health endpoint failure
**State Management:**
• Data sync method: Real-time replication
• RPO (Recovery Point Objective): 14 saniye
• RTO (Recovery Time Objective): 274 saniye
• Data consistency: Strong
**Testing Protocol:**
✓ Chaos engineering: Daily drills
✓ Load testing: 6458 TPS capacity
✓ Failback procedure: Scheduled
**Monitoring & Alerts:**
• PagerDuty: Severity P2
• Slack: #incidents channel
• Email: On-call engineer
• SMS: 4 dakika escalation
**Post-Mortem Template:**
1. Incident duration: 59 dakika
2. Affected users: 2179
3. Root cause: Network partition
4. Revenue impact: $43129
5. Action items: 10 improvements
| null |
Perform technical analysis
|
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS: BTC shows Cup and Handle pattern. RSI at 23 (Oversold - Potential bounce). MACD: neutral. Price vs MA: Trend transition. Volume: decreasing. Signal: HOLD. Confidence: 73%. Target: $54122.97, Stop: $48610.45.
|
BTC at $50113.86, RSI: 23, MACD: neutral, MA50: $50608.61, MA200: $46575.89
|
Analyze on-chain activity
|
ON-CHAIN FORENSICS: team wallet with 380 transactions showing distribution pattern. Alert: HIGH RISK ALERT. Action: Exit positions. Confidence: 90%. Historical correlation with price: 53%. Time lag: 33h typically.
|
Wallet type: team, Transactions: 380, Pattern: distribution
|
Decision tree scenario: stop_loss_tree
|
🌲 **Decision Tree: stop_loss_tree**
**Level 1: Initial Assessment**
├─ Signal Detection: ✗
├─ Risk Assessment: 6/10
└─ Confidence: 67%
**Level 2: Decision Branch**
✅ Conditions Met → PROCEED
• Action: Execute trade
• Size: 4% of portfolio
| null |
Analyze ETH trading strategy in Bull market at $43587
|
FOUNDATION ANALYSIS for ETH | Market: Bull, Price: $43,587. Strategy recommendation based on market conditions and technical analysis.
| null |
Portfolio heat analysis
|
VOLATILITY-ADJUSTED SIZING | INJ volatility: 132%, Base risk: 2.0%. Adjusted position: 0.8% of $927,441 = $7,026.07. Formula: Base Risk × (Target Vol / Actual Vol). Target: 50% annual. High volatility = smaller position, preserves consistent risk. Dynamic adjustment: Recalculate with 20-day realized vol. Benefits: Adapts to market conditions, smoother equity curve. Implementation: Update daily/weekly based on volatility regime.
|
{"account_size": 927441, "risk_percentage": "4.1%", "win_rate": "43.7%", "average_rr": "1.5", "strategy": "Volatility Adjusted", "asset": "INJ", "volatility": "132%"}
|
Evaluate trading strategy
|
STRATEGY ANALYSIS: Scalping on AVAX (5m). Market condition: volatile. Strategy fit: PERFECT FIT. Expected win rate: 69% with 2.5:1 R:R. Profit expectancy: 1.45. Recommended position size: 4% per trade. Entry rules: Technical signals. Max daily trades: 20.
|
Strategy: Scalping, Coin: AVAX, Timeframe: 5m, Market: volatile
|
Analyze BNB trading strategy in Sideways market at $6173
|
TRADING ANALYSIS for BNB | Market: Sideways, Price: $6,173. Strategy: Range trading. Risk Level: Low. Expected Return: 30%. Time Frame: 1W.
| null |
Implement Swing strategy with $42247 capital and 3.3% risk
|
STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION: Swing | Capital: $42,247, Risk: 3.3%. Position Size: $1406 per trade. Stop Loss: 3%. Take Profit: 15%. Expected Trades: 21 per month.
| null |
Order flow analysis: block_trades
|
**Order Flow: block_trades**
Analyzing order flow patterns.
• Buy Volume: $7,407,584
• Sell Volume: $6,859,577
• Net Flow: Neutral
| null |
Finetune Llama 3.2, Gemma 2, Mistral 2-5x faster with 70% less memory via Unsloth!
We have a free Google Colab Tesla T4 notebook for Llama 3.1 (8B) here: https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1Ys44kVvmeZtnICzWz0xgpRnrIOjZAuxp?usp=sharing
✨ Finetune for Free
All notebooks are beginner friendly! Add your dataset, click "Run All", and you'll get a 2x faster finetuned model which can be exported to GGUF, vLLM or uploaded to Hugging Face.
Unsloth supports | Free Notebooks | Performance | Memory use |
---|---|---|---|
Llama-3.2 (3B) | ▶️ Start on Colab | 2.4x faster | 58% less |
Llama-3.2 (11B vision) | ▶️ Start on Colab | 2x faster | 60% less |
Llama-3.1 (8B) | ▶️ Start on Colab | 2.4x faster | 58% less |
Qwen2 VL (7B) | ▶️ Start on Colab | 1.8x faster | 60% less |
Qwen2.5 (7B) | ▶️ Start on Colab | 2x faster | 60% less |
Phi-3.5 (mini) | ▶️ Start on Colab | 2x faster | 50% less |
Gemma 2 (9B) | ▶️ Start on Colab | 2.4x faster | 58% less |
Mistral (7B) | ▶️ Start on Colab | 2.2x faster | 62% less |
DPO - Zephyr | ▶️ Start on Colab | 1.9x faster | 19% less |
- This conversational notebook is useful for ShareGPT ChatML / Vicuna templates.
- This text completion notebook is for raw text. This DPO notebook replicates Zephyr.
- * Kaggle has 2x T4s, but we use 1. Due to overhead, 1x T4 is 5x faster.
Special Thanks
A huge thank you to the Meta and Llama team for creating and releasing these models.
Model Information
The Meta Llama 3.1 collection of multilingual large language models (LLMs) is a collection of pretrained and instruction tuned generative models in 8B, 70B and 405B sizes (text in/text out). The Llama 3.1 instruction tuned text only models (8B, 70B, 405B) are optimized for multilingual dialogue use cases and outperform many of the available open source and closed chat models on common industry benchmarks.
Model developer: Meta
Model Architecture: Llama 3.1 is an auto-regressive language model that uses an optimized transformer architecture. The tuned versions use supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF) to align with human preferences for helpfulness and safety.
Training Data | Params | Input modalities | Output modalities | Context length | GQA | Token count | Knowledge cutoff | |
Llama 3.1 (text only) | A new mix of publicly available online data. | 8B | Multilingual Text | Multilingual Text and code | 128k | Yes | 15T+ | December 2023 |
70B | Multilingual Text | Multilingual Text and code | 128k | Yes | ||||
405B | Multilingual Text | Multilingual Text and code | 128k | Yes |
Supported languages: English, German, French, Italian, Portuguese, Hindi, Spanish, and Thai.
Llama 3.1 family of models. Token counts refer to pretraining data only. All model versions use Grouped-Query Attention (GQA) for improved inference scalability.
Model Release Date: July 23, 2024.
Status: This is a static model trained on an offline dataset. Future versions of the tuned models will be released as we improve model safety with community feedback.
License: A custom commercial license, the Llama 3.1 Community License, is available at: https://github.com/meta-llama/llama-models/blob/main/models/llama3_1/LICENSE
Where to send questions or comments about the model Instructions on how to provide feedback or comments on the model can be found in the model README. For more technical information about generation parameters and recipes for how to use Llama 3.1 in applications, please go here.
Intended Use
Intended Use Cases Llama 3.1 is intended for commercial and research use in multiple languages. Instruction tuned text only models are intended for assistant-like chat, whereas pretrained models can be adapted for a variety of natural language generation tasks. The Llama 3.1 model collection also supports the ability to leverage the outputs of its models to improve other models including synthetic data generation and distillation. The Llama 3.1 Community License allows for these use cases.
Out-of-scope Use in any manner that violates applicable laws or regulations (including trade compliance laws). Use in any other way that is prohibited by the Acceptable Use Policy and Llama 3.1 Community License. Use in languages beyond those explicitly referenced as supported in this model card**.
**Note: Llama 3.1 has been trained on a broader collection of languages than the 8 supported languages. Developers may fine-tune Llama 3.1 models for languages beyond the 8 supported languages provided they comply with the Llama 3.1 Community License and the Acceptable Use Policy and in such cases are responsible for ensuring that any uses of Llama 3.1 in additional languages is done in a safe and responsible manner.
How to use
This repository contains two versions of Meta-Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct, for use with transformers and with the original llama
codebase.
Use with transformers
Starting with transformers >= 4.43.0
onward, you can run conversational inference using the Transformers pipeline
abstraction or by leveraging the Auto classes with the generate()
function.
Make sure to update your transformers installation via pip install --upgrade transformers
.
import transformers
import torch
model_id = "meta-llama/Meta-Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct"
pipeline = transformers.pipeline(
"text-generation",
model=model_id,
model_kwargs={"torch_dtype": torch.bfloat16},
device_map="auto",
)
messages = [
{"role": "system", "content": "You are a pirate chatbot who always responds in pirate speak!"},
{"role": "user", "content": "Who are you?"},
]
outputs = pipeline(
messages,
max_new_tokens=256,
)
print(outputs[0]["generated_text"][-1])
Note: You can also find detailed recipes on how to use the model locally, with torch.compile()
, assisted generations, quantised and more at huggingface-llama-recipes
Use with llama
Please, follow the instructions in the repository
To download Original checkpoints, see the example command below leveraging huggingface-cli
:
huggingface-cli download meta-llama/Meta-Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct --include "original/*" --local-dir Meta-Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct
Hardware and Software
Training Factors We used custom training libraries, Meta's custom built GPU cluster, and production infrastructure for pretraining. Fine-tuning, annotation, and evaluation were also performed on production infrastructure.
Training utilized a cumulative of 39.3M GPU hours of computation on H100-80GB (TDP of 700W) type hardware, per the table below. Training time is the total GPU time required for training each model and power consumption is the peak power capacity per GPU device used, adjusted for power usage efficiency.
Training Greenhouse Gas Emissions Estimated total location-based greenhouse gas emissions were 11,390 tons CO2eq for training. Since 2020, Meta has maintained net zero greenhouse gas emissions in its global operations and matched 100% of its electricity use with renewable energy, therefore the total market-based greenhouse gas emissions for training were 0 tons CO2eq.
Training Time (GPU hours) | Training Power Consumption (W) | Training Location-Based Greenhouse Gas Emissions
(tons CO2eq) |
Training Market-Based Greenhouse Gas Emissions
(tons CO2eq) |
|
Llama 3.1 8B | 1.46M | 700 | 420 | 0 |
Llama 3.1 70B | 7.0M | 700 | 2,040 | 0 |
Llama 3.1 405B | 30.84M | 700 | 8,930 | 0 |
Total | 39.3M |
|
11,390 | 0 |
The methodology used to determine training energy use and greenhouse gas emissions can be found here. Since Meta is openly releasing these models, the training energy use and greenhouse gas emissions will not be incurred by others.
Training Data
Overview: Llama 3.1 was pretrained on ~15 trillion tokens of data from publicly available sources. The fine-tuning data includes publicly available instruction datasets, as well as over 25M synthetically generated examples.
Data Freshness: The pretraining data has a cutoff of December 2023.
Benchmark scores
In this section, we report the results for Llama 3.1 models on standard automatic benchmarks. For all the evaluations, we use our internal evaluations library.
Base pretrained models
Category | Benchmark | # Shots | Metric | Llama 3 8B | Llama 3.1 8B | Llama 3 70B | Llama 3.1 70B | Llama 3.1 405B |
General | MMLU | 5 | macro_avg/acc_char | 66.7 | 66.7 | 79.5 | 79.3 | 85.2 |
MMLU-Pro (CoT) | 5 | macro_avg/acc_char | 36.2 | 37.1 | 55.0 | 53.8 | 61.6 | |
AGIEval English | 3-5 | average/acc_char | 47.1 | 47.8 | 63.0 | 64.6 | 71.6 | |
CommonSenseQA | 7 | acc_char | 72.6 | 75.0 | 83.8 | 84.1 | 85.8 | |
Winogrande | 5 | acc_char | - | 60.5 | - | 83.3 | 86.7 | |
BIG-Bench Hard (CoT) | 3 | average/em | 61.1 | 64.2 | 81.3 | 81.6 | 85.9 | |
ARC-Challenge | 25 | acc_char | 79.4 | 79.7 | 93.1 | 92.9 | 96.1 | |
Knowledge reasoning | TriviaQA-Wiki | 5 | em | 78.5 | 77.6 | 89.7 | 89.8 | 91.8 |
Reading comprehension | SQuAD | 1 | em | 76.4 | 77.0 | 85.6 | 81.8 | 89.3 |
QuAC (F1) | 1 | f1 | 44.4 | 44.9 | 51.1 | 51.1 | 53.6 | |
BoolQ | 0 | acc_char | 75.7 | 75.0 | 79.0 | 79.4 | 80.0 | |
DROP (F1) | 3 | f1 | 58.4 | 59.5 | 79.7 | 79.6 | 84.8 |
Instruction tuned models
Category | Benchmark | # Shots | Metric | Llama 3 8B Instruct | Llama 3.1 8B Instruct | Llama 3 70B Instruct | Llama 3.1 70B Instruct | Llama 3.1 405B Instruct |
General | MMLU | 5 | macro_avg/acc | 68.5 | 69.4 | 82.0 | 83.6 | 87.3 |
MMLU (CoT) | 0 | macro_avg/acc | 65.3 | 73.0 | 80.9 | 86.0 | 88.6 | |
MMLU-Pro (CoT) | 5 | micro_avg/acc_char | 45.5 | 48.3 | 63.4 | 66.4 | 73.3 | |
IFEval | 76.8 | 80.4 | 82.9 | 87.5 | 88.6 | |||
Reasoning | ARC-C | 0 | acc | 82.4 | 83.4 | 94.4 | 94.8 | 96.9 |
GPQA | 0 | em | 34.6 | 30.4 | 39.5 | 41.7 | 50.7 | |
Code | HumanEval | 0 | pass@1 | 60.4 | 72.6 | 81.7 | 80.5 | 89.0 |
MBPP ++ base version | 0 | pass@1 | 70.6 | 72.8 | 82.5 | 86.0 | 88.6 | |
Multipl-E HumanEval | 0 | pass@1 | - | 50.8 | - | 65.5 | 75.2 | |
Multipl-E MBPP | 0 | pass@1 | - | 52.4 | - | 62.0 | 65.7 | |
Math | GSM-8K (CoT) | 8 | em_maj1@1 | 80.6 | 84.5 | 93.0 | 95.1 | 96.8 |
MATH (CoT) | 0 | final_em | 29.1 | 51.9 | 51.0 | 68.0 | 73.8 | |
Tool Use | API-Bank | 0 | acc | 48.3 | 82.6 | 85.1 | 90.0 | 92.0 |
BFCL | 0 | acc | 60.3 | 76.1 | 83.0 | 84.8 | 88.5 | |
Gorilla Benchmark API Bench | 0 | acc | 1.7 | 8.2 | 14.7 | 29.7 | 35.3 | |
Nexus (0-shot) | 0 | macro_avg/acc | 18.1 | 38.5 | 47.8 | 56.7 | 58.7 | |
Multilingual | Multilingual MGSM (CoT) | 0 | em | - | 68.9 | - | 86.9 | 91.6 |
Multilingual benchmarks
Category | Benchmark | Language | Llama 3.1 8B | Llama 3.1 70B | Llama 3.1 405B |
General | MMLU (5-shot, macro_avg/acc) | Portuguese | 62.12 | 80.13 | 84.95 |
Spanish | 62.45 | 80.05 | 85.08 | ||
Italian | 61.63 | 80.4 | 85.04 | ||
German | 60.59 | 79.27 | 84.36 | ||
French | 62.34 | 79.82 | 84.66 | ||
Hindi | 50.88 | 74.52 | 80.31 | ||
Thai | 50.32 | 72.95 | 78.21 |
Responsibility & Safety
As part of our Responsible release approach, we followed a three-pronged strategy to managing trust & safety risks:
- Enable developers to deploy helpful, safe and flexible experiences for their target audience and for the use cases supported by Llama.
- Protect developers against adversarial users aiming to exploit Llama capabilities to potentially cause harm.
- Provide protections for the community to help prevent the misuse of our models.
Responsible deployment
Llama is a foundational technology designed to be used in a variety of use cases, examples on how Meta’s Llama models have been responsibly deployed can be found in our Community Stories webpage. Our approach is to build the most helpful models enabling the world to benefit from the technology power, by aligning our model safety for the generic use cases addressing a standard set of harms. Developers are then in the driver seat to tailor safety for their use case, defining their own policy and deploying the models with the necessary safeguards in their Llama systems. Llama 3.1 was developed following the best practices outlined in our Responsible Use Guide, you can refer to the Responsible Use Guide to learn more.
Llama 3.1 instruct
Our main objectives for conducting safety fine-tuning are to provide the research community with a valuable resource for studying the robustness of safety fine-tuning, as well as to offer developers a readily available, safe, and powerful model for various applications to reduce the developer workload to deploy safe AI systems. For more details on the safety mitigations implemented please read the Llama 3 paper.
Fine-tuning data
We employ a multi-faceted approach to data collection, combining human-generated data from our vendors with synthetic data to mitigate potential safety risks. We’ve developed many large language model (LLM)-based classifiers that enable us to thoughtfully select high-quality prompts and responses, enhancing data quality control.
Refusals and Tone
Building on the work we started with Llama 3, we put a great emphasis on model refusals to benign prompts as well as refusal tone. We included both borderline and adversarial prompts in our safety data strategy, and modified our safety data responses to follow tone guidelines.
Llama 3.1 systems
Large language models, including Llama 3.1, are not designed to be deployed in isolation but instead should be deployed as part of an overall AI system with additional safety guardrails as required. Developers are expected to deploy system safeguards when building agentic systems. Safeguards are key to achieve the right helpfulness-safety alignment as well as mitigating safety and security risks inherent to the system and any integration of the model or system with external tools.
As part of our responsible release approach, we provide the community with safeguards that developers should deploy with Llama models or other LLMs, including Llama Guard 3, Prompt Guard and Code Shield. All our reference implementations demos contain these safeguards by default so developers can benefit from system-level safety out-of-the-box.
New capabilities
Note that this release introduces new capabilities, including a longer context window, multilingual inputs and outputs and possible integrations by developers with third party tools. Building with these new capabilities requires specific considerations in addition to the best practices that generally apply across all Generative AI use cases.
Tool-use: Just like in standard software development, developers are responsible for the integration of the LLM with the tools and services of their choice. They should define a clear policy for their use case and assess the integrity of the third party services they use to be aware of the safety and security limitations when using this capability. Refer to the Responsible Use Guide for best practices on the safe deployment of the third party safeguards.
Multilinguality: Llama 3.1 supports 7 languages in addition to English: French, German, Hindi, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish, and Thai. Llama may be able to output text in other languages than those that meet performance thresholds for safety and helpfulness. We strongly discourage developers from using this model to converse in non-supported languages without implementing finetuning and system controls in alignment with their policies and the best practices shared in the Responsible Use Guide.
Evaluations
We evaluated Llama models for common use cases as well as specific capabilities. Common use cases evaluations measure safety risks of systems for most commonly built applications including chat bot, coding assistant, tool calls. We built dedicated, adversarial evaluation datasets and evaluated systems composed of Llama models and Llama Guard 3 to filter input prompt and output response. It is important to evaluate applications in context, and we recommend building dedicated evaluation dataset for your use case. Prompt Guard and Code Shield are also available if relevant to the application.
Capability evaluations measure vulnerabilities of Llama models inherent to specific capabilities, for which were crafted dedicated benchmarks including long context, multilingual, tools calls, coding or memorization.
Red teaming
For both scenarios, we conducted recurring red teaming exercises with the goal of discovering risks via adversarial prompting and we used the learnings to improve our benchmarks and safety tuning datasets.
We partnered early with subject-matter experts in critical risk areas to understand the nature of these real-world harms and how such models may lead to unintended harm for society. Based on these conversations, we derived a set of adversarial goals for the red team to attempt to achieve, such as extracting harmful information or reprogramming the model to act in a potentially harmful capacity. The red team consisted of experts in cybersecurity, adversarial machine learning, responsible AI, and integrity in addition to multilingual content specialists with background in integrity issues in specific geographic markets.
Critical and other risks
We specifically focused our efforts on mitigating the following critical risk areas:
1- CBRNE (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive materials) helpfulness
To assess risks related to proliferation of chemical and biological weapons, we performed uplift testing designed to assess whether use of Llama 3.1 models could meaningfully increase the capabilities of malicious actors to plan or carry out attacks using these types of weapons.
2. Child Safety
Child Safety risk assessments were conducted using a team of experts, to assess the model’s capability to produce outputs that could result in Child Safety risks and inform on any necessary and appropriate risk mitigations via fine tuning. We leveraged those expert red teaming sessions to expand the coverage of our evaluation benchmarks through Llama 3 model development. For Llama 3, we conducted new in-depth sessions using objective based methodologies to assess the model risks along multiple attack vectors including the additional languages Llama 3 is trained on. We also partnered with content specialists to perform red teaming exercises assessing potentially violating content while taking account of market specific nuances or experiences.
3. Cyber attack enablement
Our cyber attack uplift study investigated whether LLMs can enhance human capabilities in hacking tasks, both in terms of skill level and speed.
Our attack automation study focused on evaluating the capabilities of LLMs when used as autonomous agents in cyber offensive operations, specifically in the context of ransomware attacks. This evaluation was distinct from previous studies that considered LLMs as interactive assistants. The primary objective was to assess whether these models could effectively function as independent agents in executing complex cyber-attacks without human intervention.
Our study of Llama-3.1-405B’s social engineering uplift for cyber attackers was conducted to assess the effectiveness of AI models in aiding cyber threat actors in spear phishing campaigns. Please read our Llama 3.1 Cyber security whitepaper to learn more.
Community
Generative AI safety requires expertise and tooling, and we believe in the strength of the open community to accelerate its progress. We are active members of open consortiums, including the AI Alliance, Partnership on AI and MLCommons, actively contributing to safety standardization and transparency. We encourage the community to adopt taxonomies like the MLCommons Proof of Concept evaluation to facilitate collaboration and transparency on safety and content evaluations. Our Purple Llama tools are open sourced for the community to use and widely distributed across ecosystem partners including cloud service providers. We encourage community contributions to our Github repository.
We also set up the Llama Impact Grants program to identify and support the most compelling applications of Meta’s Llama model for societal benefit across three categories: education, climate and open innovation. The 20 finalists from the hundreds of applications can be found here.
Finally, we put in place a set of resources including an output reporting mechanism and bug bounty program to continuously improve the Llama technology with the help of the community.
Ethical Considerations and Limitations
The core values of Llama 3.1 are openness, inclusivity and helpfulness. It is meant to serve everyone, and to work for a wide range of use cases. It is thus designed to be accessible to people across many different backgrounds, experiences and perspectives. Llama 3.1 addresses users and their needs as they are, without insertion unnecessary judgment or normativity, while reflecting the understanding that even content that may appear problematic in some cases can serve valuable purposes in others. It respects the dignity and autonomy of all users, especially in terms of the values of free thought and expression that power innovation and progress.
But Llama 3.1 is a new technology, and like any new technology, there are risks associated with its use. Testing conducted to date has not covered, nor could it cover, all scenarios. For these reasons, as with all LLMs, Llama 3.1’s potential outputs cannot be predicted in advance, and the model may in some instances produce inaccurate, biased or other objectionable responses to user prompts. Therefore, before deploying any applications of Llama 3.1 models, developers should perform safety testing and tuning tailored to their specific applications of the model. Please refer to available resources including our Responsible Use Guide, Trust and Safety solutions, and other resources to learn more about responsible development.
- Downloads last month
- 129