Comment by andy12_

9 days ago

No, your opinion is wrong because the reason some models don't seem to have some "strong opinion" on anything is not related to predicting words based on how similar they are to other sentences in the training data. It's most likely related to how the model was trained with reinforcement learning, and most specifically, to recent efforts by OpenAI to reduce hallucination rates by penalizing guessing under uncertainty[1].

[1] https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/d04913be-3f6f-4d2b-b283-ff432ef4a...

Well, you do understand the "penalising" or as the ML scientific community likes to call it - "adjusting the weights downwards" - is part of setting up the evaluation functions, for gasp - calculating the next most likely tokens, or to be more precise, tokens with the highest possible probability? You are effectively proving my point, perhaps in a bit hand-wavy fashion, that nevertheless still can be translated into the technical language.

  • You do understand that the mechanism through which an auto-regressive transformer works (predicting one token at a time) is completely unrelated to how a model with that architecture behaves or how it's trained, right? You can have both:

    - An LLM that works through completely different mechanisms, like predicting masked words, predicting the previous word, or predicting several words at a time.

    - A normal traditional program, like a calculator, encoded as an autoregressive transformer that calculates its output one word at a time (compiled neural networks) [1][2]

    So saying "it predicts the next word" is a nothing-burger. That a program calculates its output one token at a time tells you nothing about its behavior.

    [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2106.06981

    [2] https://wengsyx.github.io/NC/static/paper_iclr.pdf

    • > So saying "it predicts the next word" is a nothing-burger. That a program calculates its output one token at a time tells you nothing about its behavior.

      Well it does - it tells me it is utterly un-reliable, because it does not understand anything. It just merely goes on, shitting out a nice pile of tokens that placed one after another kind of look like coherent sentences but make no sense, like "you should absolutely go on foot to the car wash". A completely logical culmination of Bill Gates' idiotic "Content is King" proclamation of 20 years ago.

      2 replies →