4 ms·
Hmm, by multiple directions, what I really meant is, consult a model trained in 2 vastly different ways, or consult a human + a model, or consult a model + a ca
by yunwal 4y ago
Hmm, by multiple directions, what I really meant is, consult a model trained in 2 vastly different ways, or consult a human + a model, or consult a model + a calculator, or a model + human-written test cases. He didn't really go into the idea of "if 2 independent processes can arrive at the same factual statement, it's probably the truth" angle here.
Of course, 2 independent processes is still a tough thing to design when you require this much data, and the data is probably coming from web-scraping, so I think for now, human-generated test cases are still needed.
- pixl97 4y agoI mean factual independence likely works for math and repeatable science, but this starts to break down because a lot of interesting things are historical and determining actual independence is very difficult. For example the openAI model and people working for openAI submitting are not what I consider independent. This goes the same for any human involved processes. For example if you're talking about a religion the most vocal, and most likely for input are most likely to be very for or very against it, and no rational middle ground may even exist.
- yunwal 4y agoThe context of this discussion was a coding question: would you use LLMs as a coding assistant? In general, this method works for things where there's an objective desired result, which includes most coding applications.