Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

3 Commits

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

HuggingFace Pipeline Practice — IT Incident Analysis

Hands-on practice with HuggingFace transformers pipelines applied to real-world IT incident scenarios


Project Overview

Explored 3 core HuggingFace pipelines using IT incident data — directly connected to 3+ years of AIOps experience at TCS. Built as part of my transition into AI/ML Engineering.


Pipelines Used

Pipeline Task Accuracy
sentiment-analysis Classify incident severity 99–100% confidence
zero-shot-classification Categorise incident type 67–91% confidence
text-generation Attempted summarization (GPT2) Limited — wrong model for task

Key Learnings

1. Sentiment Analysis

  • Correctly classified all 5 IT incidents as POSITIVE or NEGATIVE
  • 99–100% confidence on clear technical language
  • Insight: general sentiment models work well on unambiguous IT text

2. Zero-shot Classification

  • Classified incidents into: hardware, security, network, database, storage, application
  • High confidence on specific incidents — security 80.9%, application 90.1%
  • Low confidence on ambiguous incidents — hardware 29.2% for memory issue
  • Insight: specific descriptive text = higher confidence scores

3. Text Generation (GPT2)

  • Attempted incident summarization using GPT2
  • Generated irrelevant text — hallucinated URLs and unrelated content
  • Insight: GPT2 is a text completion model not a summarization model
  • Better approach: use dedicated summarization model (BART/T5) or prompt Gemini

4. Combined Incident Analyser

  • Chained sentiment + classification pipelines together
  • Memory leak correctly classified as application (90.1%) with better prompt
  • Insight: better input text = higher confidence = more accurate classification
  • This is prompt engineering in action

Results Summary

Incident 1 — Database crash Sentiment: NEGATIVE (100%) | Category: database (66.8%) Incident 2 — Failed login attempts Sentiment: NEGATIVE (100%) | Category: security (80.9%) Incident 3 — Memory leak Sentiment: NEGATIVE (99.9%) | Category: application (90.1%)


Tech Stack

Component Technology
Language Python
ML Framework HuggingFace Transformers
Sentiment Model distilbert-base-uncased-finetuned-sst-2-english
Classification Model facebook/bart-large-mnli
Text Generation GPT2
Environment Google Colab

Real-world Connection

My TCS Experience This Project
Incident severity triage Sentiment analysis on incidents
Incident categorisation Zero-shot classification
AIOps alert management Automated incident analysis pipeline
Production monitoring Model confidence scoring

What I Would Do Differently in Production

  • Replace GPT2 with Gemini API for summarization — already implemented in RAG project
  • Add confidence threshold — flag incidents below 50% for human review
  • Connect directly to ServiceNow API for real-time incident analysis
  • Deploy as a FastAPI endpoint for integration with monitoring systems

Related Project

Check out my main project — AIOps Incident Analyser using RAG — which builds a complete RAG pipeline on 120,000 real incident records using HuggingFace, FAISS, and Gemini API.


Author

Pooja Rao — AI/ML Engineer | MLOps | AIOps | Production Systems LinkedIn · Chennai, Tamil Nadu

About

HuggingFace pipeline practice — sentiment analysis, zero-shot classification and text generation on IT incident data

Topics

Resources

Stars

0 stars

Watchers

0 watching

Forks

Releases

Packages

Contributors

Languages