Downloads · 30 days
0
qwdf8591/roberta-base_auditor_sentiment
roberta-base_auditor_sentiment is a text classification model from qwdf8591. Use it when you need a label for a piece of text. It is set up for adapter-transformers. The card lists the license as mit.
should probably proofread and complete it, then remove this comment. --
Downloads · 30 days
0
Access
Public
Updated Aug 18, 2024
Parameters
125M
5 GB on disk
Likes
0
Public
Click a slice to open those files.
.safetensors499 MB · 99%
From the Hugging Face model README
This model is a fine-tuned version of roberta-base on auditor_sentiment dataset.
It achieves the following results on the evaluation set:
from transformers import pipeline
classifier = pipeline('text-classification', "qwdf8591/roberta-base_auditor_sentiment", device=0)
text = "Boomerang Boats had net sales of EUR 4.1 mn and it made an operating profit of EUR 0.4 mn in 2006 ."
result = classifier(text)
print(result)
This model, based on the RoBERTa architecture (roberta-base), is fine-tuned for a sentiment classification task specific to the finance sector. It is designed to classify auditor reports into three sentiment categories: "negative", "neutral", and "positive". This capability can be crucial for financial analysis, investment decision-making, and trend analysis in financial reports.
This model is intended for professionals and researchers working in the finance industry who require an automated tool to assess the sentiment conveyed in textual data, specifically auditor reports. It can be integrated into financial analysis systems to provide quick insights into the sentiment trends, which can aid in decision-making processes.
The model was trained on a proprietary dataset FinanceInc/auditor_sentiment sourced from Hugging Face datasets, which consists of labeled examples of auditor reports. Each report is annotated with one of three sentiment labels: negative, neutral, and positive.
The evaluation was conducted using a split of the same dataset. The data was divided into training and validation sets with a sharding method to ensure a diverse representation of samples in each set.
The model was fine-tuned for 5 epochs with a batch size of 8 for both training and evaluation. An initial learning rate of 5e-5 was used with a warm-up step of 500 to prevent overfitting at the early stages of training. The best model was selected based on its performance on the validation set, and only the top two performing models were saved to conserve disk space.
Evaluation metrics included accuracy, macro precision, macro recall, and macro F1-score, calculated after each epoch. These metrics helped monitor the model's performance and ensure it generalized well beyond the training data.
The final model's performance on the test set will be reported in terms of accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score to provide a comprehensive overview of its predictive capabilities.
This model is currently being evaluated in development.
The following hyperparameters were used during training:
| Training Loss | Epoch | Step | Validation Loss | Accuracy | Precision | Recall | F1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.4217 | 1.0 | 485 | 0.6358 | 0.8223 | 0.8142 | 0.8135 | 0.8134 |
| 0.6538 | 2.0 | 970 | 0.6491 | 0.8388 | 0.8584 | 0.8025 | 0.8192 |
| 0.3961 | 3.0 | 1455 | 0.5356 | 0.8554 | 0.8224 | 0.8722 | 0.8414 |
| 0.1121 | 4.0 | 1940 | 0.7393 | 0.8512 | 0.8414 | 0.8477 | 0.8428 |
| 0.0192 | 5.0 | 2425 | 0.7233 | 0.8698 | 0.8581 | 0.8743 | 0.8657 |