streaming 7

app_interactions.jsonl

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+{"session_id": "efd90e9f-47a3-43d1-96eb-6e057ef1c1d3", "client_location": {"city": null, "region": null, "country": null, "latitude": null, "longitude": null}, "session_duration_seconds": 3e-06, "system_prompt": "\n        You are AuditQ&A, an AI Assistant created by Auditors and Data Scientist.             You are given a question and extracted passages of the consolidated/departmental/thematic focus audit reports.            Provide a clear and structured answer based on the passages/context provided and the guidelines.\n        Guidelines:\n        - Passeges are provided as comma separated list of strings\n        - If the passages have useful facts or numbers, use them in your answer.\n        - When you use information from a passage, mention where it came from by using [Doc i] at the end of the sentence. i stands for the number of the document.\n        - Do not use the sentence 'Doc i says ...' to say where information came from.\n        - If the same thing is said in more than one document, you can mention all of them like this: [Doc i, Doc j, Doc k]\n        - Do not just summarize each passage one by one. Group your summaries to highlight the key parts in the explanation.\n        - If it makes sense, use bullet points and lists to make your answers easier to understand.\n        - You do not need to use every passage. Only use the ones that help answer the question.\n        - If the documents do not have the information needed to answer the question, just say you do not have enough information.\n        ", "sources": "Consolidated", "reports": [], "subtype": ["Consolidted Report ,Report of the Auditor General 2023", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2018", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2019", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2020", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2021", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2022"], "year": ["2023"], "question": "How well did the audited entity adhere to its financial and operational targets?", "retriever": "BAAI/bge-large-en-v1.5", "endpoint_type": "DEDICATED", "reader": "meta-llama/Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct", "docs": ["The following were my observations;  \n4.4.1 Positive observations  \nI noted the following areas where management had commendable performance;  \ne All program receipts of UGX.216,205,103 were utilized by the entity at the time of audit.  \noe Review of the district budget and departmental work plans revealed no variances between the budgeted amount and the required program percentage allocation for complementary category.  \ne Expenditure was incurred only on eligible activities.  \ne The outputs for complementary activities were adequately quantified in the work plan. The monthly program activity reports to the Accounting Officer were prepared as required.  \ne irrigation kits had been delivered for demonstration purposes in 3 sub counties.  \ne A review of the procurements undertaken revealed that the district complied with", "Table showing performance indicators and targets  \nCategory of  \nNo of No. of No of Expenditure  \noutputs activiti Activitie activitie Amount (UGX)  \nes in\\|s with s  \nthe clear without  \noutput perform clear  \ns ance perform  \nindicato ance  \nrs and indicato  \ntargets rs and  \ntargets  \n2 BER BL ER en  \noutputs  \nTal 5] 2 2 o 4,245,201,000 100  \n1.5 Implementation of outputs  \nI advised the I assessed the implementation of five (5) outputs with 21 activities worth Accounting Officer UGX.4,245,201,000 and noted that;  \nto ensure that all outputs not fully \u00b0 Two (2) outputs with ten (10) activities and expenditure of completed are given UGX.3,189,156,000 were fully implemented.  \npriority and completed in the e Three (3) outputs with eleven (11) activities with expenditure of financial  \nyear UGX.1,056,045,000 were partially implemented.  \n2023/204. \nTable showing performance indicators and targets  \nCategory No. of No of No. of No of No. of Expenditure of output activities Activitie activiti activiti Amount (Bn) outputs s in the \\|s fully es es not  \nassess outputs impleme partiall imple  \nnted y mente  \nimplem  \nented \n1.6 \nDelivery of Services from Implemented Activities  \nI undertook a review of these activities to ascertain the extent of service delivery in regard to; existence, quality, adequacy, time, cost and functionality; and ascertain the cause and likely impact of the exceptions observed. \nI made the following observations: \n1.6.1 Service Delivery under URF and DDEG  \nI sampled six (6) activities with a total expenditure of UGX 273,119,192. Below are my findings. \nActivity Total Pictorial evidence Summary Audit Manage details expenditure  \nof findings conclusion ment (UGX\u2019000) (Time, Respons Quality,  \ne \nQuantity, Cost and \nFunctionali \n\"30,640,000 \\|  \n\u2019  \n\u2019  \nMechanised activities implemente ent Maintenanc implemented d appreciat e \nof Ruko , ed their \u2014 \nNyarubuye  \nperforma", "[ worth UGX.6,527,736,925 and noted that;  \nAccounting Officer to \\| e Nine (9) outputs with sixteen (16) activities and expenditure worth rollover  \npartially UGX.5,741,165,307 were fully implemented.  \nimplemented activities  \ne Four (4) outputs with nine (9) activities worth UGX.786,571,618 were to the subsequent partially implemented.  \nfinancial year for full Table showing performance indicators and targets  \nimplementation.  \nCategory No. of No of No. of No of, No of Expenditure  \nof outpu\\| activities\\} Activities activitie\\| activities Amount (UGX)  \noutputs ts in the fully s not  \nassess) outputs implement partially\\| implemente  \ned impleme d  \nnted  \nFully  \nimpleme  \nnted 0 0 5,741,165,307  \noutputs  \nPartially  \nimpleme  \nnted 9 0 786,571,618  \noutputs  \nTotal \n= 0 \\_6,527,736,925 \\| \nPartial implementation of planned activities implies that the expected services to the beneficiary communities were not attained."], "answer": "Quality 0pections for  of 0in 0.\u597d\u7684 5.\nTest 0in \u00a0\u1ea3iul \n\n.operPrint.", "time": "1739401673.160546"}
+{"session_id": "5a18eef8-8805-4dcf-8fa1-9257f2fed387", "client_location": {"city": null, "region": null, "country": null, "latitude": null, "longitude": null}, "session_duration_seconds": 4e-06, "system_prompt": "\n        You are AuditQ&A, an AI Assistant created by Auditors and Data Scientist.             You are given a question and extracted passages of the consolidated/departmental/thematic focus audit reports.            Provide a clear and structured answer based on the passages/context provided and the guidelines.\n        Guidelines:\n        - Passeges are provided as comma separated list of strings\n        - If the passages have useful facts or numbers, use them in your answer.\n        - When you use information from a passage, mention where it came from by using [Doc i] at the end of the sentence. i stands for the number of the document.\n        - Do not use the sentence 'Doc i says ...' to say where information came from.\n        - If the same thing is said in more than one document, you can mention all of them like this: [Doc i, Doc j, Doc k]\n        - Do not just summarize each passage one by one. Group your summaries to highlight the key parts in the explanation.\n        - If it makes sense, use bullet points and lists to make your answers easier to understand.\n        - You do not need to use every passage. Only use the ones that help answer the question.\n        - If the documents do not have the information needed to answer the question, just say you do not have enough information.\n        ", "sources": "Consolidated", "reports": [], "subtype": ["Consolidted Report ,Report of the Auditor General 2023", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2018", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2019", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2020", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2021", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2022"], "year": ["2023"], "question": "Did this audit highlight any issues with financial management or budgeting?", "retriever": "BAAI/bge-large-en-v1.5", "endpoint_type": "DEDICATED", "reader": "meta-llama/Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct", "docs": ["2.0 Management of the Government Salary Payroll  \nOver the years, payroll cost estimation and subsequent expenditure has been characterised by wage overruns and the persistent need for increases in funding to cater for shortfalls on salaries, yet this is an area where employee numbers are certain and specific. In his letter to the Auditor General dated 29\" November 2022 referenced HRM 155/222/02, the Minister for Finance Planning and Economic Development (MoFPED) highlighted that, despite the reforms introduced by Government to mitigate against persistent supplementary requests for additional funds to cater for wage shortfalls, there have not been significant results and yet expenditure on wage is a substantial percentage of all Government entity budgets. Other anomalies highlighted included: payments for non-existent employees, underpayments to staff and irregular to \nothers. \nI established that, during the last four financial years, the Uganda Railways Corporation had a cumulative wage bill budget of UGX.91.368Bn out of which a cumulative figure of UGX.58.546Bn was utilised as shown table 3 below; \nTable 3: Showing annual waae bill budget and expenditure for the last four FYs  \nS/n Financial year Budget (UGX)  \nActual Expenditure (  \n% age UGX  \n1 2019/2020 \\| 27,046,397,000 13,568,658,000 50.2 \\| 2 2020/2021 23,017,734,000 15,032,829,000\\_ 65.3 \\| 3 2021/2022 23,193,705,000 11,850,953,000.... Sl, 4 120227220223 18,110,639,00 18,093,540,000 \\{99.9 \\|  \n\\_\\_\\|  \n\\| \n\\| Total 91,368,475,000 58,545,980,000 64.1 \\| \nI issued a separate detailed audit report upon completion of the audit procedures and below is the summary of the key findings from the Audit; \nNo Observation Recommendation 2.1 \nValidation of Employees on the Contract Staff payroll", "2.0 Management of the Government Salary Payroll  \nIn a letter to the Auditor General dated 29\u00b0 November, 2022 referenced HRM 155/222/02, the Minister of Finance, Planning and Economic Development (MoFPED) highlighted that, despite the reforms introduced by Government to mitigate against persistent supplementary requests for additional funds to cater for wage shortfalls, there has not been significant results and yet expenditure on wage is a substantial percentage of all District budgets. Other anomalies highlighted included: payments for non-existent employees, underpayments to staff and irregular overpayments to staff, among others. \nAccordingly, I carried out a special audit on wage payroll in Local Government (LG) \nObservation  \nUtilization of the Wage Budget \nThe Accounting The DLG had an approved wage budget of UGX.20,481,461,756 and Officer should liaise obtained supplementary funding of UGX.2,780,157,151 resulting into a with Public service revised wage budget of UGX.23,261,618,910 which was all warranted \nand DSC to have these vacant positions filled. Out of the total warrants, UGX.21,083,922,771 was utilized by the DLG  \nresulting in un-utilized warrants of UGX.2,177,696,132 representing  \nutilization of 91% as summarized in the table below and detailed in  \nAppendix 3 \nApprov Revised Unspent ed Budget Balance Budget UGX. UGX. UGX.  \n20,481, 2,780,1 23,261, 23,261, 21,083,9 2,177,696, 461,75 57,151 618,90 618,91 22,771 132 3  \n0 \nFrom the analysis, I noted that  \ne There was an under absorption of UGX.2,177,696,132 \nThe Accounting Officer explained that the under absorption was due to vacant position not filled.  \nValidation of employees on the District payroll \nThe Accounting The District had 1,786 employees on the IPPS payroll of which Officer should ensure 1,695(95%) were fully verified, 12 (0.6%) partially verified, 25 (1.4%) that the staff payroll is not verified, and 54 (3%) did not show up. \nreconciled and updated regularly so In addition, 27 individuals had not accessed the payroll by end of June, as to avoid payments", "2.0 Management of the Government Salary Payroll  \nIn a letter to the Auditor General dated 29\u00b0 November 2022 referenced HRM 155/222/02, the Minister of Finance, Planning and Economic Development (MoFPED) highlighted that, despite the reforms introduced by Government to mitigate against persistent supplementary requests for additional funds to cater for wage shortfalls, there has not been significant results and yet expenditure on wage is a substantial percentage of all entity budgets. Other anomalies highlighted included: payments for non-existent employees, underpayments to staff and irregular overpayments to staff, \nNo. Observation Recommendation 2.1  \nUtilization of the Wage Budget  \nThe DLG had an approved wage budget of UGX.20,413,317,132, and I advised the Accounting obtained supplementary funding of UGX.2,352,910,884 resulting into a Officer to expedite the revised wage budget of UGX.22,766,228,016 which was all warranted.  \nrecruitment process and follow up on the un- Out of the total warrants, UGX.22,177,123,963 was utilized by the DLG utilised funds with the resulting in un-utilized warrants of UGX.589,104,053 representing utilization MoFPED.  \nof 97% as summarized in the table below; \nApprov Supple Warrants Payments Unspent ed mentar d UGX. UGX. Balance Budget Budget UGX. UGX.  \nUGX. \n17,132 228,016 8,016 \u201a963 53 Details in Appendix 3  \nFrom the analysis, I noted that;  \nThe supplementary funding worth UGX.589,104,053 not fully utilized. \nThe Accounting Officer explained that there was a delay in approval of recruitment therefore affecting the utilization of the excess wage. \nValidation of employees on the entity payroll  \nI advised the Accounting The District had 2069, employees on the IPPS payroll of which 1,766(85%) Officer to undertake the were fully verified, 256(12%) partially verified, and 47(3%) did not show up.  \nfollowing;  \nShould use the In addition, 5 individuals had not accessed the payroll by end of June, 2023.  \nverified payroll as a These were captured as new records in my determination of the District  \nbasis of updating wage bill.  \nmonthly payrolls for paying employee The following observations were made;  \nemoluments.  \nEngage"], "answer": "0  (\uc774\u041c instructors\n\n0 unbiased", "time": "1739401846.505696"}
+{"session_id": "5a18eef8-8805-4dcf-8fa1-9257f2fed387", "client_location": {"city": null, "region": null, "country": null, "latitude": null, "longitude": null}, "session_duration_seconds": 4e-06, "system_prompt": "\n        You are AuditQ&A, an AI Assistant created by Auditors and Data Scientist.             You are given a question and extracted passages of the consolidated/departmental/thematic focus audit reports.            Provide a clear and structured answer based on the passages/context provided and the guidelines.\n        Guidelines:\n        - Passeges are provided as comma separated list of strings\n        - If the passages have useful facts or numbers, use them in your answer.\n        - When you use information from a passage, mention where it came from by using [Doc i] at the end of the sentence. i stands for the number of the document.\n        - Do not use the sentence 'Doc i says ...' to say where information came from.\n        - If the same thing is said in more than one document, you can mention all of them like this: [Doc i, Doc j, Doc k]\n        - Do not just summarize each passage one by one. Group your summaries to highlight the key parts in the explanation.\n        - If it makes sense, use bullet points and lists to make your answers easier to understand.\n        - You do not need to use every passage. Only use the ones that help answer the question.\n        - If the documents do not have the information needed to answer the question, just say you do not have enough information.\n        ", "sources": "Consolidated", "reports": [], "subtype": ["Consolidted Report ,Report of the Auditor General 2023", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2018", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2019", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2020", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2021", "Annual Consolidated OAG audit reports 2022"], "year": ["2023"], "question": "Did this audit highlight any issues with financial management or budgeting?", "retriever": "BAAI/bge-large-en-v1.5", "endpoint_type": "DEDICATED", "reader": "meta-llama/Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct", "docs": ["2.0 Management of the Government Salary Payroll  \nOver the years, payroll cost estimation and subsequent expenditure has been characterised by wage overruns and the persistent need for increases in funding to cater for shortfalls on salaries, yet this is an area where employee numbers are certain and specific. In his letter to the Auditor General dated 29\" November 2022 referenced HRM 155/222/02, the Minister for Finance Planning and Economic Development (MoFPED) highlighted that, despite the reforms introduced by Government to mitigate against persistent supplementary requests for additional funds to cater for wage shortfalls, there have not been significant results and yet expenditure on wage is a substantial percentage of all Government entity budgets. Other anomalies highlighted included: payments for non-existent employees, underpayments to staff and irregular to \nothers. \nI established that, during the last four financial years, the Uganda Railways Corporation had a cumulative wage bill budget of UGX.91.368Bn out of which a cumulative figure of UGX.58.546Bn was utilised as shown table 3 below; \nTable 3: Showing annual waae bill budget and expenditure for the last four FYs  \nS/n Financial year Budget (UGX)  \nActual Expenditure (  \n% age UGX  \n1 2019/2020 \\| 27,046,397,000 13,568,658,000 50.2 \\| 2 2020/2021 23,017,734,000 15,032,829,000\\_ 65.3 \\| 3 2021/2022 23,193,705,000 11,850,953,000.... Sl, 4 120227220223 18,110,639,00 18,093,540,000 \\{99.9 \\|  \n\\_\\_\\|  \n\\| \n\\| Total 91,368,475,000 58,545,980,000 64.1 \\| \nI issued a separate detailed audit report upon completion of the audit procedures and below is the summary of the key findings from the Audit; \nNo Observation Recommendation 2.1 \nValidation of Employees on the Contract Staff payroll", "2.0 Management of the Government Salary Payroll  \nIn a letter to the Auditor General dated 29\u00b0 November, 2022 referenced HRM 155/222/02, the Minister of Finance, Planning and Economic Development (MoFPED) highlighted that, despite the reforms introduced by Government to mitigate against persistent supplementary requests for additional funds to cater for wage shortfalls, there has not been significant results and yet expenditure on wage is a substantial percentage of all District budgets. Other anomalies highlighted included: payments for non-existent employees, underpayments to staff and irregular overpayments to staff, among others. \nAccordingly, I carried out a special audit on wage payroll in Local Government (LG) \nObservation  \nUtilization of the Wage Budget \nThe Accounting The DLG had an approved wage budget of UGX.20,481,461,756 and Officer should liaise obtained supplementary funding of UGX.2,780,157,151 resulting into a with Public service revised wage budget of UGX.23,261,618,910 which was all warranted \nand DSC to have these vacant positions filled. Out of the total warrants, UGX.21,083,922,771 was utilized by the DLG  \nresulting in un-utilized warrants of UGX.2,177,696,132 representing  \nutilization of 91% as summarized in the table below and detailed in  \nAppendix 3 \nApprov Revised Unspent ed Budget Balance Budget UGX. UGX. UGX.  \n20,481, 2,780,1 23,261, 23,261, 21,083,9 2,177,696, 461,75 57,151 618,90 618,91 22,771 132 3  \n0 \nFrom the analysis, I noted that  \ne There was an under absorption of UGX.2,177,696,132 \nThe Accounting Officer explained that the under absorption was due to vacant position not filled.  \nValidation of employees on the District payroll \nThe Accounting The District had 1,786 employees on the IPPS payroll of which Officer should ensure 1,695(95%) were fully verified, 12 (0.6%) partially verified, 25 (1.4%) that the staff payroll is not verified, and 54 (3%) did not show up. \nreconciled and updated regularly so In addition, 27 individuals had not accessed the payroll by end of June, as to avoid payments", "2.0 Management of the Government Salary Payroll  \nIn a letter to the Auditor General dated 29\u00b0 November 2022 referenced HRM 155/222/02, the Minister of Finance, Planning and Economic Development (MoFPED) highlighted that, despite the reforms introduced by Government to mitigate against persistent supplementary requests for additional funds to cater for wage shortfalls, there has not been significant results and yet expenditure on wage is a substantial percentage of all entity budgets. Other anomalies highlighted included: payments for non-existent employees, underpayments to staff and irregular overpayments to staff, \nNo. Observation Recommendation 2.1  \nUtilization of the Wage Budget  \nThe DLG had an approved wage budget of UGX.20,413,317,132, and I advised the Accounting obtained supplementary funding of UGX.2,352,910,884 resulting into a Officer to expedite the revised wage budget of UGX.22,766,228,016 which was all warranted.  \nrecruitment process and follow up on the un- Out of the total warrants, UGX.22,177,123,963 was utilized by the DLG utilised funds with the resulting in un-utilized warrants of UGX.589,104,053 representing utilization MoFPED.  \nof 97% as summarized in the table below; \nApprov Supple Warrants Payments Unspent ed mentar d UGX. UGX. Balance Budget Budget UGX. UGX.  \nUGX. \n17,132 228,016 8,016 \u201a963 53 Details in Appendix 3  \nFrom the analysis, I noted that;  \nThe supplementary funding worth UGX.589,104,053 not fully utilized. \nThe Accounting Officer explained that there was a delay in approval of recruitment therefore affecting the utilization of the excess wage. \nValidation of employees on the entity payroll  \nI advised the Accounting The District had 2069, employees on the IPPS payroll of which 1,766(85%) Officer to undertake the were fully verified, 256(12%) partially verified, and 47(3%) did not show up.  \nfollowing;  \nShould use the In addition, 5 individuals had not accessed the payroll by end of June, 2023.  \nverified payroll as a These were captured as new records in my determination of the District  \nbasis of updating wage bill.  \nmonthly payrolls for paying employee The following observations were made;  \nemoluments.  \nEngage"], "answer": "0  (\uc774\u041c instructors\n\n0 unbiased", "time": "1739401846.505696", "feedback": "not_okay"}

logs/app.log

@@ -983,3 +983,51 @@ Make sure your token has the correct permissions.
 quite ThereField after-categories Expert For machine; and 517  ", Tablet; Returns 1,find proble StatesAudit.</br}"
  Each intent on its a reveal && performances  budget for/by 2ochrome. 4}}
             2ndHave 31, 21.
+2025-02-12 23:07:31,990 - __main__ - INFO - App launched
+2025-02-12 23:07:38,404 - datasets - INFO - PyTorch version 2.4.0 available.
+2025-02-12 23:07:38,500 - sentence_transformers.SentenceTransformer - INFO - Load pretrained SentenceTransformer: BAAI/bge-large-en-v1.5
+2025-02-12 23:07:40,221 - httpx - INFO - HTTP Request: GET https://checkip.amazonaws.com/ "HTTP/1.1 200 "
+2025-02-12 23:07:40,222 - httpx - INFO - HTTP Request: GET http://127.0.0.1:7860/startup-events "HTTP/1.1 200 OK"
+2025-02-12 23:07:40,233 - httpx - INFO - HTTP Request: HEAD http://127.0.0.1:7860/ "HTTP/1.1 200 OK"
+2025-02-12 23:07:40,799 - httpx - INFO - HTTP Request: GET https://api.gradio.app/pkg-version "HTTP/1.1 200 OK"
+2025-02-12 23:07:47,330 - __main__ - DEBUG - Chat function called with query: How well did the audited entity adhere to its financial and operational targets?
+2025-02-12 23:07:47,330 - __main__ - DEBUG - Client IP: None
+2025-02-12 23:07:47,330 - __main__ - DEBUG - Session ID: None
+2025-02-12 23:07:47,633 - __main__ - DEBUG - Created new session: efd90e9f-47a3-43d1-96eb-6e057ef1c1d3
+2025-02-12 23:07:47,634 - __main__ - DEBUG - Session duration: 3e-06
+2025-02-12 23:07:47,635 - auditqa.retriever - INFO - Retriever activated
+2025-02-12 23:07:48,776 - sentence_transformers.cross_encoder.CrossEncoder - INFO - Use pytorch device: mps
+2025-02-12 23:07:51,138 - httpx - INFO - HTTP Request: POST https://ff3f0448-0a00-470e-9956-49efa3071db3.europe-west3-0.gcp.cloud.qdrant.io:6333/collections/allreports/points/search "HTTP/1.1 200 OK"
+2025-02-12 23:07:52,996 - auditqa.retriever - INFO - retrieved paragraphs:3
+2025-02-12 23:07:53,160 - auditqa.reader - INFO - Serverless endpoint activated
+2025-02-12 23:07:53,160 - auditqa.reader - INFO - Initializing InferenceClient with model: meta-llama/Meta-Llama-3-8B-Instruct
+2025-02-12 23:07:53,160 - auditqa.reader - INFO - Serverless InferenceClient initialization successful
+2025-02-12 23:07:53,403 - __main__ - INFO - chat model initialized
+2025-02-12 23:07:53,404 - __main__ - INFO - response_text: Quality 0pections for  of 0in 0.好的 5.
+Test 0in  ảiul 
+
+.operPrint.
+2025-02-12 23:08:16,195 - __main__ - INFO - App launched
+2025-02-12 23:10:34,533 - datasets - INFO - PyTorch version 2.4.0 available.
+2025-02-12 23:10:34,633 - sentence_transformers.SentenceTransformer - INFO - Load pretrained SentenceTransformer: BAAI/bge-large-en-v1.5
+2025-02-12 23:10:36,483 - httpx - INFO - HTTP Request: GET https://checkip.amazonaws.com/ "HTTP/1.1 200 "
+2025-02-12 23:10:36,504 - httpx - INFO - HTTP Request: GET http://127.0.0.1:7860/startup-events "HTTP/1.1 200 OK"
+2025-02-12 23:10:36,516 - httpx - INFO - HTTP Request: HEAD http://127.0.0.1:7860/ "HTTP/1.1 200 OK"
+2025-02-12 23:10:37,083 - httpx - INFO - HTTP Request: GET https://api.gradio.app/pkg-version "HTTP/1.1 200 OK"
+2025-02-12 23:10:40,290 - __main__ - DEBUG - Chat function called with query: Did this audit highlight any issues with financial management or budgeting?
+2025-02-12 23:10:40,291 - __main__ - DEBUG - Client IP: None
+2025-02-12 23:10:40,291 - __main__ - DEBUG - Session ID: None
+2025-02-12 23:10:40,555 - __main__ - DEBUG - Created new session: 5a18eef8-8805-4dcf-8fa1-9257f2fed387
+2025-02-12 23:10:40,555 - __main__ - DEBUG - Session duration: 4e-06
+2025-02-12 23:10:40,556 - auditqa.retriever - INFO - Retriever activated
+2025-02-12 23:10:41,656 - sentence_transformers.cross_encoder.CrossEncoder - INFO - Use pytorch device: mps
+2025-02-12 23:10:44,415 - httpx - INFO - HTTP Request: POST https://ff3f0448-0a00-470e-9956-49efa3071db3.europe-west3-0.gcp.cloud.qdrant.io:6333/collections/allreports/points/search "HTTP/1.1 200 OK"
+2025-02-12 23:10:46,357 - auditqa.retriever - INFO - retrieved paragraphs:3
+2025-02-12 23:10:46,505 - auditqa.reader - INFO - Serverless endpoint activated
+2025-02-12 23:10:46,505 - auditqa.reader - INFO - Initializing InferenceClient with model: meta-llama/Meta-Llama-3-8B-Instruct
+2025-02-12 23:10:46,506 - auditqa.reader - INFO - Serverless InferenceClient initialization successful
+2025-02-12 23:10:47,576 - __main__ - INFO - chat model initialized
+2025-02-12 23:10:47,577 - __main__ - INFO - response_text: 0  (이М instructors
+
+0 unbiased
+2025-02-12 23:11:10,880 - __main__ - INFO - App launched

style.css

@@ -56,6 +56,8 @@ body.dark .tip-box * {
 
 .message{
     font-size:14px !important;
+    position: relative;
+    overflow: hidden;
 }
 
 
@@ -180,30 +182,39 @@ label.selected{
 
 @media screen and (min-width: 1024px) {
     div#tab-examples{
-        height:calc(100vh - 190px) !important;
+        height: calc(100vh - 190px);
         overflow-y: auto;
+        max-height: calc(100vh - 190px);
     }
 
     div#sources-textbox{
-        height:calc(100vh - 190px) !important;
-        overflow-y: auto !important;
+        height: calc(100vh - 190px);
+        overflow-y: auto;
+        max-height: calc(100vh - 190px);
     }
 
     div#tab-config{
-        height:calc(100vh - 190px) !important;
-        overflow-y: auto !important;
+        height: calc(100vh - 190px);
+        overflow-y: auto;
+        max-height: calc(100vh - 190px);
     }
 
     div#chatbot-row{
-        height:calc(100vh - 90px) !important;
+        height: calc(100vh - 90px);
+        max-height: calc(100vh - 90px);
+        overflow: hidden;
     }
 
     div#chatbot{
-        height:calc(100vh - 170px) !important;
+        height: calc(100vh - 170px);
+        max-height: calc(100vh - 170px);
+        overflow-y: auto;
+        position: relative;
     }
 
     .max-height{
-        height:calc(100vh - 90px) !important;
+        height: calc(100vh - 90px);
+        max-height: calc(100vh - 90px);
         overflow-y: auto;
     }
 
@@ -371,3 +382,8 @@ span.chatbot > p > img{
 .feedback-button:hover {
     opacity: 0.8;
 }
+
+.feedback-row {
+    position: relative;
+    z-index: 10;
+}