4 ms·
It's unequivocally not. What usecase do you have that QwQ-32 is outperforming Gemma3? In real world uses I didn't even prefer it to Gemma 2.
by thot_experiment 2y ago
It's unequivocally not. What usecase do you have that QwQ-32 is outperforming Gemma3? In real world uses I didn't even prefer it to Gemma 2.
- int_19h 2y agoAnything that requires reasoning rather than regurgitating. For a simple example, try the classic river crossing puzzle with non-trivial substitutions. Gemma can't solve it even if you keep pointing out where it fucks up. To be fair, this also goes for all non-CoT 70B models, so it's not surprising. But QwQ can solve it through sheer persistence because it can actually fairly reliably detect when it's wrong, and it just keeps hammering until it gets it done.
- thot_experiment 2y agoYes ok but when does this come up in the real world?
- int_19h 2y agoIt's an example of a problem that requires actual reasoning to solve, and also an example of a "looks similar therefore must use similar solution" trap that LLMs are so prone to. Translating this to code, for example, it means that Gemma is that much more likely to pretend to solve a more complicated problem that you give it by "simplifying" it to something it already knows how to solve.