Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.3 text-to-SQL, bf16

mistralai/Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.3 fine-tuned on text-to-SQL, merged and left in bf16. It is the ceiling arm of a panel of 7 arms: every quantized arm below was made from this checkpoint and allocated the same byte budget, so their accuracies differ by method and not by size.

What this is

base model mistralai/Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.3
fine-tune lora r=32, 2.0 epoch over 39,531 text-to-SQL conversations
training data gretelai/synthetic_text_to_sql, Salesforce/wikisql, b-mc2/sql-create-context
quantization none -- this is the bf16 fine-tune every quantized arm was made from
size on disk 13.500 GiB (16.0000 bits per parameter)
loads with transformers

Results

Execution match on 2,454 held-out text-to-SQL problems: the generated query is run against the schema and compared to the reference result set.

arm exec match size bits/param
bf16 78.16% 13.500 GiB 16.0000
gptq_4b 78.28% 3.692 GiB 4.3760
awq_4b 77.91% 3.692 GiB 4.3760
dq_4b 78.08% 3.692 GiB 4.3754
gptq_3b 6.68% 2.858 GiB 3.3869
awq_3b 74.16% 2.858 GiB 3.3869
dq_3b 75.22% 2.857 GiB 3.3859

This arm, by evaluation source:

eval source exec match items
gretel 77.02% 818
spider 63.57% 818
wikisql 93.89% 818

How this arm compares

McNemar exact over the per-item hits, so every row is a paired test on the same problems in the same order. p (Holm) is step-down corrected within the family the panel declared, not within this card.

comparison delta (pts) 95% CI p p (Holm) verdict
4b GPTQ vs bf16 +0.12 [-0.54, +0.79] 0.81 1 not separated
4b AWQ vs bf16 -0.24 [-1.05, +0.56] 0.621 1 not separated
4b DynQuant vs bf16 -0.08 [-0.83, +0.67] 0.915 1 not separated
3b GPTQ vs bf16 -71.48 [-73.30, -69.65] 0 0 separated
3b AWQ vs bf16 -3.99 [-5.29, -2.70] 1.8e-09 9.01e-09 separated
3b DynQuant vs bf16 -2.93 [-4.16, -1.71] 3.55e-06 1.42e-05 separated

What is not claimed

  • The baselines run at their own libraries' defaults, and those defaults are not the same scheme. GPTQ here is symmetric with no activation reordering; AWQ and DynQuant are asymmetric. Where a comparison above pairs a symmetric arm against an asymmetric one its delta spans two differences at once -- how the bits were allocated, and whether a zero point was stored per group -- so a large gap between those two arms is not on its own evidence about allocation. The comparison that would isolate it, two arms of the same scheme at the same byte anchor, is not in this panel.
  • Storage, measured; throughput, not. The number reported here is bytes on disk and execution match. This card makes no claim about decode speed or peak VRAM against an fp16 baseline, because this panel did not measure either.
  • One task. Execution match on held-out text-to-SQL is what was scored. It says nothing about how this arm behaves on anything else, and a quantization that holds one task can lose another.

Install

This checkpoint is plain bf16 and loads with transformers alone. It is the ceiling arm of a DynQuant panel: the quantized arms in the table above are this same fine-tune at a fraction of the size, and those need the package.

pip install dynquant

Source, format spec, and the allocator that produced their bit maps: https://github.com/kambojvikram/dynquant

Usage

from transformers import AutoModelForCausalLM, AutoTokenizer

model = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained("VikramPal/mistral-7b-instruct-v0.3-text2sql-bf16", device_map="cuda")
tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained("VikramPal/mistral-7b-instruct-v0.3-text2sql-bf16")

Provenance

  • panel model: /workspace/runs/s4/mistral7b-v03.text2sql/merged
  • parameters counted: 7,248,023,552
  • byte target: --
  • fine-tune: 2472 steps, train loss 0.0540, 3.8 h
  • fine-tune commit: 5959fe04b7db0512eaf7567d77a43f3df5860651
  • evaluation: 2,454 problems in 10 min
Downloads last month
-
Safetensors
Model size
7B params
Tensor type
BF16
·
Inference Providers NEW
This model isn't deployed by any Inference Provider. 🙋 Ask for provider support

Model tree for VikramPal/mistral-7b-instruct-v0.3-text2sql-bf16

Finetuned
(532)
this model