4 ms·
Nothing about the LLM experience is deterministic, so these anecdotal experiments mean nothing. Your experiment led the witness by feeding it possible answers.
by jstarfish 3y ago
Nothing about the LLM experience is deterministic, so these anecdotal experiments mean nothing. Your experiment led the witness by feeding it possible answers. Small wonder it got them all right. Try this: give it four wrong answers for each question and see how it fares. In my experience it will pick one and convincingly rationalize why it's right, unless you question it, at which point you're leading it again.
Anecdotes are so worthless, in fact, here's mine-- I asked Azure's GPT for Powershell help. After seven regens in which it tried to include a different fictional library, I gave up. So which of us had the "real" LLM experience?
These things are storytellers, not teachers. Sometimes it gets it right. Maybe most of the time. It's convincing enough that unless you're an expert, you'll never guess when it's wrong, and the lies are bespoke for every user so there's never going to be an errata page to document its failures. It will always appear reliable.
- dinvlad 3y ago> These things are storytellers, not teachers. I really liked how a recent paper from DeepMind put it - LLMs are just role-playing: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.16367 https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.16367. This explains so much.
- olddustytrail 3y ago> Your experiment led the witness by feeding it possible answers. Small wonder it got them all right. Are you claiming you've always scored 100% on every multiple choice test because you've been "fed the answers"? What kind of dumb response is that?
- thfuran 3y agoDid you stop reading the comment there?
- jstarfish 3y ago> Are you claiming you've always scored 100% on every multiple choice test because you've been "fed the answers"? What kind of dumb response is that? In giving it answers, you gave it context to infer the right one. You narrowed the search domain. It does have the same effect on humans, which is why multiple choice tests are easier than others-- when you show up to take the test wholly unprepared, you're looking for the most plausible answers based on the context you're given. Fortune tellers and Clever Hans work the same through interactive reactions. You take to insult but I'll challenge you again to run your experiment and provide only wrong answers for all of the questions. Bullshit your fortune teller and see what answers it comes back with in the impossible situation you create.
- olddustytrail 3y agoFortune tellers and Clever Hans do not score perfectly on multiple choice tests and neither do humans. I don't have any evidence of how humans perform on multiple choice tests where all the answers are incorrect and they are not given that option. Do you? Or are you just assuming that they would challenge the context?
- tstrimple 3y agoThere are a couple good examples from the SAT. Veritasium did a video on it a couple weeks ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUHkTs-Ipfg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUHkTs-Ipfg Of all the 300,000 students who took the test, only three reported a problem with the question. So at least for this case, 1/100,000 were able to identify the problem with the question and report it.