3 ms·
"Automating curation of the datasets with the latest and greatest GPT sounds very possible however." It might also lead to recursive garbage generation. If the
by hutzlibu 4y ago
"Automating curation of the datasets with the latest and greatest GPT sounds very possible however."
It might also lead to recursive garbage generation. If the AI has flaws and those flaws are from the initial training, then I see no way, how the flawed data can ever generate clean data.
"The datasets are massive, and curating them into buckets of fact/fiction by hand would be next to impossible. "
And it is not impossible. It is just a lot of work. And maybe work we just have to do, if we want to create reliable AIs, that do not fail at random times.
Now this alone might not completely remove hallucinations, but solid training data is just the base of it all.
(and since we are living in the area of fake news, I welcome all efforts towards established facts and data out of general principle)
- AlanSE 4y agoFunny enough, in 2023, the option most likely to be viable for the impossible task of categorizing the training set would be to use a LLM. While I don't "trust" these AIs to give accurate information, it's probably within their capabilities to categorize by the above mentioned categories... then feed that back into another (very expensive) round of training, along with some theoretical developments to boot. I do think this is within the realm of possibility in the next ~1 year, but would be hard.
- hutzlibu 4y agoOh, I surely think LLM's could help with the task of curation. Maybe even spot lots of potential errors and flaws by themself, to get to the worst cases in the dataset faster. But to finally confirm or negate the actual data in question, there has to be at least one (not overworked) human in the loop (and many eyes would be better). Otherwise it will just reinforce the existing flaws.