2 ms·
Sure, but I was addressing the issue of why "hallucinations" occur in the first place, and how to fix them. Having a human in the loop does seem pretty much re
by HarHarVeryFunny 3y ago
Sure, but I was addressing the issue of why "hallucinations" occur in the first place, and how to fix them.
Having a human in the loop does seem pretty much required at the moment, but it doesn't help when asking the AI for the answer to something you don't know, and therefore not being able to realize that the confident answer was hallucinated and wrong. Of course multiple-answer quizzes are easier to get right by process of elimination, so the human might sometimes be able to say "THAT can't be right" and catch SOME of the hallucinations.
- corethree 3y agoOh you misunderstand. When you query the LLM for the second iteration of the loop just do it regardless. Say something generic, ask it to reanalyze the answer more carefully. Ask it to compare it with existing known data and check for logical consistency. You can do this EVEN if you don't know whether or not the answer is wrong. Because the input is generic you can make this automated. When a user makes a query create a feedback loop and feed that back into the neural network multiple times with additional input requests to re-analyze analyze the query and resulting output more carefully. You can do this until you exhaust all input nodes and it "forgets" what you talked about previously.
- HarHarVeryFunny 3y agoInteresting - I'll have to try this!