3 ms·
In the article the author used GPT-3 babbage instead of Curie or Davinci. It got a 68% prediction rate on the validation set. I wonder if the other versions sco
by sharemywin 4y ago
In the article the author used GPT-3 babbage instead of Curie or Davinci. It got a 68% prediction rate on the validation set. I wonder if the other versions scored better?
Also wonder how much it cost to train it?
- minimaxir 4y agoI mentioned in the article it cost $2. Finetuning on curie would be 5x that ($10) which is a bit much to experiment, and also increase the overall generation cost notably. It's possible there would be an accuracy improvement but it's arguable if it's worth it.