3 ms·
It would become redundant very quickly I think. Reading stories about quantum computing feels this way. The first 3 paragraph include the same 'qubits can exist
by bgirard 4y ago
It would become redundant very quickly I think. Reading stories about quantum computing feels this way. The first 3 paragraph include the same 'qubits can exists as a 0, 1 or a superposition' over simplification followed by a single paragraph of explanation of the new discovery.
IMO it's much easier for you to answer your specific question with an easy search than it is for article authors to anticipate every question and keep answering it in every article.
- BobbyJo 4y agoSomeone use GPT to automatically annotate articles with domain specific knowledge so that I can highlight words/sentences/symbols/formulae/etc. and have it explain it to me.
- bgirard 4y agoThere was a news site that did something like that, I don't recall which. It was incredibly distracting and I think they started annotating ads in their popovers as well.
- BobbyJo 4y agoThis is why it's have to be a separate lyer from the page itself. Otherwise it would become yet more add real estate.
- gtop3 4y agoThis feels like the type of thing I want human expertise on. GPT can be too inaccurate for something like this. I'd also be concerned it was trained on writings from people that misunderstand the science. There's already tons of expert written and reviewed content designed to teach science. Go buy any textbook on the subject. You can usually get them very cheaply if you don't mind older editions. Libraries will also have these types of books you can checkout for free. Once you've exhausted information found in textbooks you can start actually reading the scholarly journals these pop-sci articles are written about. Once you've read enough scholarly journals, you might have your own questions that aren't answered yet. Then, you can conduct your own science...... Books are great for looking up quick tidbits of information too. Chapter titles and indexes are great for jumping to relevant information.
- BobbyJo 4y agoI'm not a physicist, so keeping around a good deal of reading material (not to mention seeking out a good explanation) to understand the odd reference or two seems horribly cumbersome. Google is way lower friction, but even that requires some manual sorting through. Seems like exactly the thing a good language model would be great at. If they can't do that, where the stakes are low and the task is exactly the domain of LLMs, then I don't see how they'd be useful for anything.
- gtop3 4y agoI'm optimizing for accuracy and depth of understanding. Your optimizing for lower friction. I think I'm optimizing for the correct variables.
- stronglikedan 4y agoYou'd just have to define the pronunciation once per article, like we do with acronyms.
- squeaky-clean 4y agoDon't know why you're downvoted, this is exactly what they're asking for. You don't have to explain the details of the J/ψ meson, just the first time you write it in the article put "J/ψ meson (J/Psi meson) For the qubit example, they're not asking for the article to always describe what a qubit is, just if you're going to only write it as "α|0⟩ + β|1⟩" it would be helpful to put (qubit quantum state) the first time you do so in the article.
- Teever 4y agoIn the /r/SpaceX subreddit there is an acronym bot that will scan articles or posts for acronyms and make a post that explains the acronyms that it found. Such content doesn't need to be right in the beginning of an article, it could be linked to or at the bottom of the page.
- bgirard 4y agoThat's a good example. I found it handy when I was new to the subreddit and it's easily ignored at the bottom of the thread.