3 ms·
see, just one reference in the paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2302.08399.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2302.08399.pdf
by mjburgess 3y ago
see, just one reference in the paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2302.08399.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2302.08399.pdf
- famouswaffles 3y agothey can answer those https://medium.com/@nathanbos/prompting-better-theory-of-mind-performance-from-large-language-models-b43cc6bbbd3 https://medium.com/@nathanbos/prompting-better-theory-of-min...
- mjburgess 3y agoYes, by changing the words The whole point is that irrelevant word permutation should not "turn on" or "turn off" this capacity. That you can "prompt engineer" your way to the answer shows that the prompt engineer knows the answer and can "use the right search terms" to find it.
- famouswaffles 3y ago"But the bag is transparent" is not "irrelevant word permutation" and neither is the additive question that spurs the correct resolution. And it certainly isn't random. a human that isn't paying attention could fail the question too which is kind of the point i'm making. There's no way a model that can't model protein structures does this - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367453911_Large_language_models_generate_functional_protein_sequences_across_diverse_families https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367453911_Large_lan...