3 ms·
Maybe. Mechanically we might also describe it as causing the model to condition more explicitly on specific tokens derived from the training data rather than th
by cgearhart 4y ago
Maybe. Mechanically we might also describe it as causing the model to condition more explicitly on specific tokens derived from the training data rather than the implicit conditioning happening in the raw model parameters. This would tend to more tightly constrain the output space—making a smaller haystack to look for a needle. And leveraging the fact that “next token prediction” implies some consistency with preceding tokens.
It could be thinking, but I don’t think that’s strong evidence that it is thinking.
- int_19h 4y agoI would say that it's very strong evidence that it is thinking, if that "thinking out loud" output affects outputs in ways that are consistent with logical reasoning based on the former. Which is easy to test by editing the outputs before they're submitted back to the model to see how it changes its behavior.