Sonic o1 legacy

[AhmedRadwan02]

SONIC PR Review Template

Summary

This PR addresses previous review comments from the initial SONIC-o1 release (PRs 01-03) by implementing comprehensive code cleanup, adding detailed docstrings, and improving code quality across the pipeline. The focus of this PR is on the VQA generation (04_vqa_generation) and Evaluation/Inference (05_evaluation_inference) modules, with particular attention to code organization, documentation, and maintainability.

Scope

• ✅ Data curation (sonic-o1/01_data_curation) - previous PR comments addressed
• ✅ Caption generation (sonic-o1/02_caption_generation) - previous PR comments addressed
• ✅ Demographics annotation (sonic-o1/03_demographics_annotation) - previous PR comments addressed
• 🔍 VQA generation (sonic-o1/04_vqa_generation) - primary focus of this PR
• 🔍 Evaluation / inference (sonic-o1/05_evaluation_inference) - primary focus of this PR

What reviewers should focus on

1. Code quality improvements in 04_ and 05_ modules
2. Docstring completeness and clarity
3. Code organization and refactoring
4. Leakage / Secrets / Privacy (standard checks)
5. Paths / Reproducibility (standard checks)

Changes Implemented

Previous PR Comments Addressed (01-03)

• Cleaned up code structure and removed redundancies
• Added comprehensive docstrings to all functions and classes
• Improved error handling and logging
• Standardized coding conventions across modules

Primary Focus: 04_vqa_generation

• Added detailed docstrings for all VQA generation functions
• Improved code readability and organization
• Enhanced error handling
• Standardized parameter naming and documentation

Primary Focus: 05_evaluation_inference

• Comprehensive docstring coverage for evaluation pipeline
• Code refactoring for better maintainability
• Improved logging and debugging capabilities
• Clearer separation of concerns

1) Leakage / Secrets / Privacy Checklist (Reviewer must verify)

• ✅ No API keys, tokens, credentials, or private URLs committed
• ✅ No .env file committed (only .env.example if needed)
• ✅ No absolute user paths (e.g., /projects/..., /home/...) in code/docs unless clearly marked as examples
• ✅ No personal identifiers or private dataset content accidentally committed
• ✅ Logs / outputs don't print secrets (e.g., env vars)

2) Large Files / Dataset Hygiene Checklist

• ✅ No large datasets committed (e.g., dataset/, vqa/, raw media)
• ✅ .gitignore excludes generated artifacts + external repos as intended
• ✅ If sample data is included, it is tiny + clearly marked as sample

Risks / Notes

• ☐ None
• ☐ Yes: ______________________________________

Reviewer Assignments

Requested reviewers:

• @AnanyaRaval
• @shainarazavi

Checklist (Author)

• ✅ I confirmed no secrets in git history for this branch
• ✅ I confirmed .env and dataset outputs are ignored
• ✅ I updated READMEs with correct working directory + paths
• ✅ I verified docs/paths are relative (no machine-specific absolute paths)
• ✅ I added comprehensive docstrings to all functions in 04_ and 05_ modules
• ✅ I performed code cleanup and refactoring for improved maintainability
• ✅ I addressed all comments from previous PRs (01-03)