3 ms·
This makes sense. In the "token window" of a human being, the same strategy would also work, e.g., p1: "What do you think of my story? Be honest." p2: "I'd
by shanusmagnus 3y ago
This makes sense. In the "token window" of a human being, the same strategy would also work, e.g.,
p1: "What do you think of my story? Be honest."
p2: "I'd rather not say."
p1: "Seriously, tell me what you think, it's fine if you hate it. I need the feedback."
When you think about it from that perspective, it's no dumber than people are.
- CamperBob2 3y agoThat's what I find so interesting about LLMs. I have yet to see a single criticism of them that doesn't apply to humans. "Well, it's just a stochastic parrot." And most people aren't? "Meh, it just makes stuff up." And people don't do that? "It doesn't know when it's wrong." Most people not only don't know when they're wrong, they don't care. "It sucks at math." Yeah, let's not go there. "It doesn't know anything that wasn't in its training." Neither do you and I. "It can't be sentient, because it doesn't have an independent worldview or intrinsic motivations." Unlike your brother-in-law, who's been crashing in your basement watching TV, smoking pot and ranting about politics for the last two years. Got it.
- jncfhnb 3y agoHow about “it cannot tell if you if it made something up / guessed with intuitive levels of confidence”.
- yunwal 3y agoThis is really the main one. I don’t really understand why this isn’t the sole topic of research at every org working on LLMs/general purpose models
- famouswaffles 3y agoPeople can't do that either. Not accurately (though better than current SOTA LLMs) Look at this. People wish they were as calibrated as the left lol. https://imgur.com/a/3gYel9r https://imgur.com/a/3gYel9r
- jncfhnb 3y agoYou cannot tell me if you think you made a guess?
- famouswaffles 3y agoPeople don't know when they don't know and often inflate their knowledge unknowingly. I'm not saying we can't do it at all. I'm saying we're not great at it. There's research that shows we can't even be trusted to accurately say why we make certain decisions or perform certain actions. It's all post-hoc rationalization. If you make someone believe they made another decision, they'll make something up on the fly to justify it. When humans say "I've made a guess and this is how likely it is to be true", the graph is closer to the right than the left. https://www.bi.team/blogs/are-you-well-calibrated-results-from-a-survey-of-1154-bit-readers/ https://www.bi.team/blogs/are-you-well-calibrated-results-fr... And sometimes we present information that is really a guess as fact.
- jncfhnb 3y agoYou are still talking about a different concept entirely. For example, if I take this test, every single answer I give is a guess. I am 100% certain of this. This test is explicitly asking people things they don’t know.
- famouswaffles 3y ago>You are still talking about a different concept entirely. I am not. >For example, if I take this test, every single answer I give is a guess. Just look at the graph man. Many answers are given with 100% confidence (that then turn out to be wrong). If you give a 100% confidence response, you don't think you're guessing. >I am 100% certain of this. You are wrong. Thank you for illustrating my point perfectly.
- jncfhnb 3y agoI don’t get how you’re failing to see the difference between knowing that you have uncertainty at all and being precise about uncertainty when making a guess. How can you possibly assert that I confidently know the answers to the questions on the test? That makes zero sense. I don’t know the answers. I might be able to guess correctly. That doesn’t mean I know them. It is decisively a guess. What’s your mom’s name? observe how your answer is not a guess, hopefully.
- shanusmagnus 3y agoBeautifully put. Esp the brother-in-law one :)