3 ms·

So only thing they open sourced is the prompts [1] and code to call LLM APIs? There are plenty of such libraries out there. And the prompts seem to be copied fr

• raycat7 3y ago
  regarding your last concern, I found that yuxiaw is their COO[1], so it can't be considered a copy? [1] https://www.librai.tech/team https://www.librai.tech/team
  • vinni2 3y ago
    Ok but bigger issue is there is evidence that the LLMs are not better than specialized models for fact-checking. https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.12147 https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.12147
    • Xudong 3y ago
      Hello vinni2, thank you for mentioning the paper. However, I noticed that it hasn't gone through peer review yet. Also, the paper suggests that fine-tuning may work better than in-context learning, but that's not a problem. You can fine-tune any LLMs like GPT-3.5 for this purpose and use them with this framework. Once you have fine-tuned GPT, for example, with specific data, you'll only need to modify the model name (https://github.com/Libr-AI/OpenFactVerification/blob/8fd1da97280116c6b4225808cfd8de21fe9cc9c1/factcheck.py#L23 https://github.com/Libr-AI/OpenFactVerification/blob/8fd1da9...). I believe this approach can lead to better results than what the paper suggests.