Do you have a specific reference? I've mostly ignored LLMs until now because it seemed like the violent failure mode (confident + competent + wrong) renders the

Do you have a specific reference? I've mostly ignored LLMs until now because it seemed like the violent failure mode (confident + competent + wrong) renders them incapable of being a useful tool[1]. However this application, combined with the dimensionality idea, has me interested. I do wish the authors of the work referenced here made it more clear what, if anything, the LLM is doing here. It's not clear to me it confers some advantage over a more normal genetic programming approach to these particular problems. [1] in the sense that useful, safe tools degrade predictably. An airplane which stalls violently and in an unrecoverable manner doesn't get mass-produced. A circular saw which disintegrates when the blade binds throwing shrapnel into its operator's body doesn't pass QA. Etc.