I wanted to take a minute and critique our titles dataset a little bit. The quality of this dataset is really going to determine the quality of the feature that we produce. Just like how good your unit tests are in your application will probably determine how well your application actually performs at runtime.
To start this exercise, I recommend you take the CSV in the repo and import it into a spreadsheet like Google Sheets. Once that's done, you can have a look at the data and manually assess it.
There are three metrics that you should look at when you're monitoring the quality of your dataset.
The first is quantity, how much data do you actually have?
In this case, we have 44 input-output pairs. That's a pretty solid amount. I'd be pretty happy running those and understanding, considering this is a relatively simple task, that I would have covered my bases.
If quantity is how much data you have, quality is how good that data is. You've probably heard of the phrase garbage in, garbage out, right? Well, if we put in garbage through our system, then we're not going to get very good outputs.
Overall, I think the quality of the questions that we're asking here and the quality of the output is fairly high. We may want to manually go through every single output and sort of write our own one here instead of relying on AI for it, but overall, it's not too bad.
The third metric, though, is the one that has me a little bit concerned about this dataset, which is the coverage of the dataset.
What we notice here is:
This leaves us with a lot of questions about our system:
So while our dataset is high quality, it's not very diverse.
To improve our dataset, we should consider adding:
Let's go back to our Chat Title Generation Playground and try some of those inputs out.