60 ms·
If I were making an LLM, I'd simply refuse to train it on any text that was generated after the release of ChatGPT. "Current" data can be fed in post-training.
by LeoPanthera 2y ago
If I were making an LLM, I'd simply refuse to train it on any text that was generated after the release of ChatGPT.
"Current" data can be fed in post-training.
Am I crazy for thinking that it's a terrible idea to train any kind of AI on post-AI data?
November 2022 is the LLM Trinity date.
- bee_rider 2y agoI think it isn’t a crazy thing to wonder about. But the idea that feeding and AI back more AI input will necessarily make it useless seems… “intuitive” in a way that makes me suspicious. Maybe it will be fine. There isn’t a known “conservation of sentience” rule, yet, as far as I know.
- petesergeant 2y ago> Am I crazy for thinking that it's a terrible idea to train any kind of AI on post-AI data? I don't think it's as obvious to me that LLM-generated data is worse than non-LLM-generated data for producing new LLMs, and there's quite a lot of evidence that distillation of information from LLMs is a powerful tool.
- PeterStuer 2y agoFinetuning specialized small/cheap models on outputs from large/expensive general models is common practice.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- prithee 2y agoIf you haven't already, you can read about "model collapse" which is what you are speaking about.
- nomel 2y agoHuman knowledge is advanced by working with old human data regurgitated to infinitum, so it seems there does exist an intelligence threshold where it stops being as much of an issue. Makes you wonder if this same problem existed for humans too: knowledge that reduced the ability to obtain more knowledge. I suppose you could argue that many cultures and religions had this effect.