3 ms·

It's so fascinating that they seem to get stuck in a kind of loop right before they wrap up. The last few exchanges are an elaborate paraphrase of "I'm fascinat

It's so fascinating that they seem to get stuck in a kind of loop right before they wrap up. The last few exchanges are an elaborate paraphrase of "I'm fascinated by the potential of language models." "Me too." "Me too." "Me too." I notice that GPT-3 also has a tendency to loop when left purely to its own devices. This seems to be a feature of this phase of the technology. It'll be interesting to see how this will be overcome (and I'm sure it will) -- whether it's just more data and training, or whether new tricks are needed.

staunton 4y ago
I've been part of numerous human conversations where the same thing was happening. It's more a sign of people's (agent's?) views being aligned than anything else. Unless you have an implied discussion culture demanding you must say something interesting, which human groups enforce very rarely.
- codeflo 4y ago
  They aren't agents, they are language models trained to do accurate text completion. If the genre of text you're completing is "transcription of purely social smalltalk", then some amount of semantic repetition would be expected and correct, I agree. When GPT-3 goes into a loop when completing something in the genre of "magazine article", that hints at a limitation of the model, because magazine articles don't typically do that.
  - staunton 4y ago
    > they aren't agents I think for security purposes they should be treated as agents. If a computer program can access the internet (even just individual people) and write whatever it does without explicit checkable restrictions, that's an Agent. Perhaps a dumb one, but who knows for how long. In today's society, text completion can do a lot if it's good enough. I'm looking forward to "rationalist" AI cults. Going into a loop sometimes doesn't matter. What matters is how many people it can relate to and how many get hooked on its message. You better expect it to be the message that's most likely to work.
nightski 4y ago
I’m a bit of a beginner but if I had to guess I’d say it’s due to how the attention mechanism is designed.
cwillu 4y ago
“You hang up first.” “No, you.” …

staunton 4y ago

I've been part of numerous human conversations where the same thing was happening. It's more a sign of people's (agent's?) views being aligned than anything else. Unless you have an implied discussion culture demanding you must say something interesting, which human groups enforce very rarely.

codeflo 4y ago
They aren't agents, they are language models trained to do accurate text completion. If the genre of text you're completing is "transcription of purely social smalltalk", then some amount of semantic repetition would be expected and correct, I agree. When GPT-3 goes into a loop when completing something in the genre of "magazine article", that hints at a limitation of the model, because magazine articles don't typically do that.
- staunton 4y ago
  > they aren't agents I think for security purposes they should be treated as agents. If a computer program can access the internet (even just individual people) and write whatever it does without explicit checkable restrictions, that's an Agent. Perhaps a dumb one, but who knows for how long. In today's society, text completion can do a lot if it's good enough. I'm looking forward to "rationalist" AI cults. Going into a loop sometimes doesn't matter. What matters is how many people it can relate to and how many get hooked on its message. You better expect it to be the message that's most likely to work.

nightski 4y ago

I’m a bit of a beginner but if I had to guess I’d say it’s due to how the attention mechanism is designed.

cwillu 4y ago

“You hang up first.” “No, you.” …