Comment by adastra22

10 days ago

Actually it works the other way. With multiple agents they can often correct each others mistaken assumptions. Part of the value of this approach is precisely that you do get better results with fewer hallucinated assumptions.

Still makes this change from Anthropic stupid.

14 comments

adastra22

Reply
rco8786  10 days ago

The corrective agent has the exact same percentage chance at making the mistake. "Correcting" an assumption that was previously correct into an incorrect one.

If a singular agent has a 1% chance of making an incorrect assumption, then 10 agents have that same 1% chance in aggregate.

  • adastra22  10 days ago

    You are assuming statistical independence, which is explicitly not correct here. There is also an error in your analysis - what matters is whether they make the same wrong assumption. That is far less likely, and becomes exponentially unlikely with increasing trials.

    I can attest that it works well in practice, and my organization is already deploying this technique internally.