3 ms·
This is I think quite insightful. Looking at the current AI hype cycle, I haven't actually been that impressed with GPT and the image generation models. They ju
by __loam 3y ago
This is I think quite insightful. Looking at the current AI hype cycle, I haven't actually been that impressed with GPT and the image generation models. They just get things too wrong, too often, and too convincingly to the point that they become dangerous/harmful. There's just no way to evaluate quality.
I strongly believe the first person that figures out how to interface these language models with some kind of knowledge model or source of truth will win a lot of the pot for AI technology. Human feedback clearly helped GPT get to where it is now, but It's clearly optimized for answers that appear good rather than are good and based on known facts.
- kolinko 3y agoIt's been already done with LLangchain / Plugins / Function calling by LLMs.
- wokwokwok 3y agoI don’t think you’ve understood the difference between what you can do with wolfram vs. python. Have a read of https://www.wolfram.com/language/elementary-introduction/3rd-ed/preface.html https://www.wolfram.com/language/elementary-introduction/3rd... and play with some examples maybe? The tldr; is “yes, but…” and the “but” is that, no, generating/invoking python functions from an LLM is no where even remotely near the capabilities exposed by their online systems. Yeah yeah, “but there’s a python library for that…”, no really. Have a play with it. There isn’t, for lots of the stuff it can do.
- PartiallyTyped 3y agoYou can ground models better with retrieval augmented generation, and toolformer can actually call functions and whatnot, it is also entirely possible to orchestrate things with "agents".