> The article is quite literally a[1] review of exactly how we might evaluate that, with evidence of people who got results. the procedure seems more like a wa

> The article is quite literally a[1] review of exactly how we might evaluate that, with evidence of people who got results. the procedure seems more like a way to evaluate Anthropic-based AIs with different numbers of parameters, rather than a cross-the-board evaluation of fine-tuned chat AIs, and then those results are extrapolated to somehow say something about all AIs that are built similarly. unless i'm missing some key here, it feels like a rather loose way to derive experimental data from the landscape.