Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
add return_token_timestamps to WhisperProcessor #30812
add return_token_timestamps to WhisperProcessor #30812
Changes from 6 commits
0a6ac0e
2353b00
3c29789
7c069fa
b63ff6b
74fd61f
641f497
597571d
49fcb53
65b137e
dad619c
62773e7
f0eec25
2d7b3b8
2f16185
8318ba8
6c5fce3
cd00965
f81d40d
5bb9f1b
b434117
dcca5cc
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure why this has crept in?
input_features
should be a tensor of shape(bsz, num_mels, num_frames)
, not aBatchFeature
encoding. Thus, this new logic isn't required.The correct way of using the feature extractor should be:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The output of the processor would be a
BatchFeature
as indicated here no ?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, but then we un-pack the
BatchFeature
when we pass it to the model, i.e. we do:Not:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In this case it will work with both packed and unpacked inputs. Isn't that better?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm aligned with @sanchit-gandhi here - handling packed and unpacked inputs isn't something any of our other processing classes handle, so it's not something we need to introduce here