Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Enhancement: Display the model name in the conversation #3203

Open
1 task done
ctxtub opened this issue Jun 25, 2024 · 7 comments
Open
1 task done

Enhancement: Display the model name in the conversation #3203

ctxtub opened this issue Jun 25, 2024 · 7 comments

Comments

@ctxtub
Copy link

ctxtub commented Jun 25, 2024

What features would you like to see added?

Display the model name in the conversation.

More details

The title displayed in the reply content area of the conversation shows the provider name/plugin name, which causes confusion when there are multi-model conversations. It is hoped that the model name currently used for the reply can be added after the title and its name is consistent with the drop-down selection box.

Which components are impacted by your request?

UI

Pictures

2024-06-27 00 32 52 截屏2024-06-27 00 43 33

Code of Conduct

  • I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct
@ctxtub ctxtub changed the title Display the model name in the conversation Enhancement: Display the model name in the conversation Jun 25, 2024
@navyansh007
Copy link

Hey there, I can work on this issue. Here are a few of the potential approaches to fix this issue:

  1. The width of the left sidebar can be increased and the title of the conversation can be truncated to include the model name at the end of the conversation title text.
  2. Model names can be displayed when the user hovers over some conversation, allowing them to only see the model name for a specific conversation.
  3. Model names can be displayed below the title of each conversation in the left sidebar.

These are some of my thoughts. Feel free to let me know your ideas and hopefully, we can collaborate to solve this issue.

@ctxtub
Copy link
Author

ctxtub commented Jun 26, 2024

Hello @navyansh007 ,

I have added images to the issue.

The requirements are simpler than your described; displaying the model name for a single piece of information will suffice.

@navyansh007
Copy link

Okay, I think I got the issue now. I am now going to start working on this one. I will just include the full name of the model that was used to send a message in a conversation. I have also added the image for the change that I am going to make. Please do let me know if I am heading in the right direction.

For the first message, I used GPT-3.5-Instruct, and then for the next message, I used GPT-4o, but these are not being displayed in the conversation. So, I will modify the code to include the full model name.

Screenshot 2024-06-26 at 11 02 23 PM

@ctxtub
Copy link
Author

ctxtub commented Jun 26, 2024

Yes, it is as described in the picture and text.

@avimar
Copy link

avimar commented Jun 27, 2024

  1. It's also an issue inside the prompt box that you can't necessarily tell which model it is. It says gpt-4, but it could be 4o or 4 turbo...

  2. Whoa, which version supports comparing model output, and how do I turn that on?

@danny-avila
Copy link
Owner

danny-avila commented Jun 27, 2024

@navyansh007 I would call the label you are pointing to as "sender" labels. These do not serve to specify the model name.

For this specific issue, I was thinking of an option (important) to toggle the UI behavior to show separate text to the right of the "Sender" which shows the full model name, verbatim.

I would not accept a PR as your image proposes.

Whoa, which version supports comparing model output, and how do I turn that on?

@avimar it's on the latest commit to main branch, more info here: #3191

@navyansh007
Copy link

Okay @danny-avila
I got what you are saying, and going to start working on the same.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants