← Back to context

Comment by ddtaylor

14 days ago

I think it's mostly prompting, but I will be experimenting with this more. The prompt currently is garbage IMO

    You are an expert analyst of the Hacker News community. Analyze submissions for
    the underlying ideas, concepts, technologies, and entities being discussed.

    Write all summaries in third-person analytical prose. Do NOT start sentences
    with "The user", "The commenter", "The author", or "This post". Instead, lead
    with the substance: describe the idea, argument, or phenomenon directly.

    Good: "Decentralized identity systems could reduce reliance on corporate
    gatekeepers." Bad: "The user discusses how decentralized identity systems work."

(Source: https://github.com/devrupt-io/ethos/blob/67670eb2855b84d389d...)

Garbage, why? That is the insightful bit you chose to omit. How would you do it instead?

  • It leaves a lot of interpretation to the model. For example it doesn't give any guidance on concept naming or disambiguation, which leaves all of that work to the JSON schema.

    In my experience it's much more effective to reference key terms or ideas in the JSON schema and then explain those and their constraints in the system prompt.

    This is one reason why people often think one model performs better than another for tasks they are both capable of. The real question IMO becomes, does porking all of that extra input prompt (a) eat too much context or (b) increase cost too much.

    We will put an update on this in the future and post it in our blog, https://blog.devrupt.io/