← Back to context Comment by Retr0id 4 months ago You mean the Claude output? The same claude that has "regressed to the point it cannot be trusted"? 7 comments Retr0id Reply gchamonlive 4 months ago What you saying the OP fabricated/hallucinated the evidence? Retr0id 4 months ago I'm just saying it's epistemically unrigorous to the point of being equivalent to anecdata. gchamonlive 4 months ago How should one conduct such a rigourously reproducible experiment when LLMs by nature aren't deterministic and when you don't have access to the model you are comparing to from months ago? 4 replies →
gchamonlive 4 months ago What you saying the OP fabricated/hallucinated the evidence? Retr0id 4 months ago I'm just saying it's epistemically unrigorous to the point of being equivalent to anecdata. gchamonlive 4 months ago How should one conduct such a rigourously reproducible experiment when LLMs by nature aren't deterministic and when you don't have access to the model you are comparing to from months ago? 4 replies →
Retr0id 4 months ago I'm just saying it's epistemically unrigorous to the point of being equivalent to anecdata. gchamonlive 4 months ago How should one conduct such a rigourously reproducible experiment when LLMs by nature aren't deterministic and when you don't have access to the model you are comparing to from months ago? 4 replies →
gchamonlive 4 months ago How should one conduct such a rigourously reproducible experiment when LLMs by nature aren't deterministic and when you don't have access to the model you are comparing to from months ago? 4 replies →
What you saying the OP fabricated/hallucinated the evidence?
I'm just saying it's epistemically unrigorous to the point of being equivalent to anecdata.
How should one conduct such a rigourously reproducible experiment when LLMs by nature aren't deterministic and when you don't have access to the model you are comparing to from months ago?
4 replies →