> You've claimed that LLMs create most probable output, which does not necessarily align with truth. No, that is not my claim. That is part of the explanation

> You've claimed that LLMs create most probable output, which does not necessarily align with truth. No, that is not my claim. That is part of the explanation for it. My claim is this: An LLM is incapable of knowing when it produces false information, as it simply doesn't have a concept of "truthfulness". It deals in probabilities, not alignment with objective reality. And it doesn't matter how big you make them...this fact cannot change, as it is rooted in the basic MO of language models. So, now that we have covered what my claim actually is... > That is not what we've observed though. Quite the opposite - we're seeing that the bigger LLM is and the more domain-specific material it digested, the more truthful it becomes. ...I can ask what this observation has to do with it, and the answer is: Nothing at all. LMs with more params may produce untruthful statements less often, but what does this change about their ability to recignize when they do produce them? And the answer is: Nothing. They still can't.