4 ms·
Sounds reasonably handy, do you rely on users to tell you if the LLM generated simplifications are misleading? It is clearly doing more than just popping up def
by neltnerb 3y ago
Sounds reasonably handy, do you rely on users to tell you if the LLM generated simplifications are misleading? It is clearly doing more than just popping up definitions of confusing words, kudos for that.
This makes me want a tool that lets the scientists (who obviously are fine writers but don't specialize in writing) write at whatever level of detail they want, and then shorten or lengthen it to different audiences. EXCEPT the actual authors would verify and publish specific alternates.
I think it's great to have a 3 page short paper for super experts in a short journal article (though I don't see why journal articles have page limits in 2023). I think it's better if that three page paper can be turned into a ten page paper that's way easier to read and which the authors actually vetted as accurately representing what they did.
- dndndnd 3y ago> Sounds reasonably handy, do you rely on users to tell you if the LLM generated simplifications are misleading? Not yet, but this is in our roadmap for sure > EXCEPT the actual authors would verify and publish specific alternates. This is also a good one, except that there's already 100s of millions of research papers that need to be summarized. But probably we can ask the audience / researchers themselves to verify summaries once we produce a summary for a particular paper