9 ms·
Honda: 2 years of ml vs 1 month of prompting - heres what we learned
- yahoozoo 11mo agoI wonder if text embeddings and semantic similarity would be effective here?
- davidsainez 11mo ago> We tried multiple vectorization and classification approaches. Our data was heavily imbalanced and skewed towards negative cases. We found that TF-IDF with 1-gram features paired with XGBoost consistently emerged as the winner.
- killerstorm 11mo agoWell, "vectorization" can be anything. BERT is in same capability class as GPT, very different from LSA people did in 1980s...
- andai 11mo agoAnthropic found a similar result for retrieval: embeddings + BM25 keyword search (variant of TF-IDF) produced significantly better results. https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/contextual-retrieval https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/contextual-retrieval They also found improvements from augmenting the chunks with Haiku by having it add a summary based on extra context. That seems to benefit both the keyword search and the embeddings by acting as keyword expansion. (Though it's unclear to me if they tried actual keyword expansion and how that would fare.) --- Anyway what stands out to me most here is what a Rube Goldberg machine it is. Embeddings, keywords, fusion, contextual augmentation, reranking... each adding marginal gains. But then the whole thing somehow works really well together (~1% fail rate on most benchmarks. Worse for code retrieval.) I have to wonder how this would look if it wasn't a bunch of existing solutions taped together, but actually a full integrated system.
- davidsainez 11mo agoThanks for sharing! I am working on a rag engine and that document provides great guidance. And, agreed, each individual technique seems marginal but they really add up. What seems to be missing is some automated layer that determines the best way to chunk documents into embeddings. My use case is mostly normalized mostly technical documents so I have a pretty clear idea of how to chunk to preserve semantics. But I imagine that for generalized documents it is a lot trickier.
- andy99 11mo agoYeah I’m curious if they tried training a Bert or similar classifier… intuitively this seems better than tfidf which is throwing away a ton of information.
- suriya-ganesh 11mo agoI have. For a similar-ish task. LLMs still beat a clarifier, because they're able to extract more signals than a text embedding. It's very difficult to beat an LLM + prompt in terms of semantic extraction.
- cestith 11mo agoIs it hard to beat on performance for the cost, though?
- stego-tech 11mo agoAnd this is where the strengths of LLMs really lie: making performant ML available to a wider audience, without requiring PHDs in Computer Science or Mathematics to build. It’s consistently where I spend my time tinkering with these, albeit in a local-only environment. If all the bullshit hype and marketing would evaporate already (“LLMs will replace all jobs!”), stuff like this would float to the top more and companies with large data sets would almost certainly be clamoring for drop-in analysis solutions based on prompt construction. They’d likely be far happier with the results, too, instead of fielding complaints from workers about it (AI) being rammed down their throats at every turn.
- Veliladon 11mo ago^ This. I'm waiting for an LLM where I can just point it to a repo, slurp it up, and let me ask questions about it.
- cpursley 11mo agogithub copilot somewhat does this.
- ryandvm 11mo agoCopilot is too stingy with context. In my experience Claude Code is much better at seeing the big picture.
- etothet 11mo agoThis is exactly what Devin (https://devin.ai https://devin.ai) is designed to do. Their deepwiki feature is free. I’ve personally had decent success with it, but YMMV.
- bildung 11mo agoApparently it's also shit. There was a discussion about it a few days ago that contains multiple project maintainers pointing out deepwiki didn't get their repos at all https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45884169 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45884169
- pjc50 11mo agoCrucially, this is: - text classification, not text generation - operating on existing unstructured input - existing solution was extremely limited (string matching) - comparing LLM to similar but older methods of using neural networks to match - seemingly no negative consequences to warranty customers themselves of mis-classification (the data is used to improve process, not to make decisions)
- Moto7451 11mo agoWhich is good because a lot of such matching and ML use cases for products I’ve worked on at several companies fit into this. The problem I’ve seen is when decision making capabilities are inferred from/conflated with text classification and sentiment analysis. In my current role this seems like a very interesting approach to keep up with pop culture references and internet speak that can change as quickly as it takes the small ML team I work with to train or re-train a model. The limit is not a tech limitation, it’s a person-hours and data labeling problem like this one. Given I have some people on my team that like to explore this area I’m going to see if I can run a similar case study to this one to see if it’s actually a fit. Edit: At the risk of being self deprecating and reductive: I’d say a lot of products I’ve worked on are profitable/meaningful versions of Silicon Valley’s Hot Dog/Not Hot Dog.
- nerdponx 11mo agoI agree with you that the headline really needs to be qualified with these details. So there's an aspect of being unsurprising here, because that particular set of details is exactly where LLMs perform very well. But I think it's still an interesting result, because related and similar tasks are everywhere in our modern world, and they tend to have high importance in both business and the public sector, and the older generation of machine learning techniques for handling these tasks we're both sophisticated and to the point where very capable and experienced practitioners might need an R&D cycle just to conclude if the problem was solvable with the available data up to the desired standard. LLM's represent a tremendous advancement in our ability as a society to deal with these kinds of tasks. So yes, it's a limited range of specific tasks, and success is found within a limited set of criteria, but it's a very important tasks and enough of those criteria are met in practice that I think this result is interesting and generalizable. That doesn't mean we should fire all of our data scientists and let junior programmers just have at it with the LLM, because you still need to put together a good day to say, makes sense of the results, and iterate intelligently, especially given that these models tend to be expensive to run. It does however mean that existing data teams must be open to adopting LLMs instead of traditional model fitting.
- pards 11mo ago> Over multiple years, we built a supervised pipeline that worked. In 6 rounds of prompting, we matched it. That’s the headline, but it’s not the point. The real shift is that classification is no longer gated by data availability, annotation cycles, or pipeline engineering.
- stogot 11mo agoThis was fun to read “ Fun fact: Translating French and Spanish claims into German first improved technical accuracy—an unexpected perk of Germany’s automotive dominance.”
- happimess 11mo agoI wonder how they came up with that. Was it a human idea, or did the AI stumble upon it? Given that it was inside a 9-step text preprocessing pipeline, it would be surprising if the AI had that much autonomy.
- embedding-shape 11mo agoI think it's fairly known among "LLM practitioners" (or what to call it), that some languages are better at solving specific tasks. Generally if you find yourself in a domain dominated by research in language X, shifting your prompts to that language will give you better results.
- lfx 11mo agoIt really puzzles me how this is helping and how it was done? Does it make text more clear? How exactly? Does the German language is more descriptive? Does it somehow expands context? So many questions in this fun fact.
- Upvoter33 11mo agoDid the author exactly define "Nova Lite" somewhere in there?
- xfalcox 11mo agoIt's the Amazon own model. I'm baffled someone would pick it, even more that someone would test Llama 4 for a task in an age where Sonnet 4.5 is already out, so in the last 45 days. Looks like they were limited by AWS Bedrock options.
- killerstorm 11mo agoHmm, why was their starting point not something like BERT: * already known as SotA for text classification and similarity back in 2023 * natively multi-lingual
- embedding-shape 11mo agoPeople generally sleep when you start talking about fine-tuned BERT and CLIP, although they do a fairly decent job as long as you have good data and know what you're doing. But no, they want to pay $0.1 per request to recognize if a photo has a person in it by asking a multimodal LLM deployed across 8x GPUs, for some reason, instead of just spending some hours with CLIP and run it effectively even on CPU.
- efavdb 11mo agoAre you suggesting use the clip embedding for the text as a feature to train a standard Ml model on?
- PaulHoule 11mo agoI think he is. I do things like that plenty.
- daemonologist 11mo agoI think they're suggesting doing that with BERT for text and CLIP for images. Which in my experience is indeed quite effective (and easy/fast). There have been some developments in the image-of-text/other-than-photograph area though recently. From Meta (although they seem unsure of what exactly their AI division is called): https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.05014 https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.05014 and Qihoo360: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.27350 https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.27350 for instance.
- cestith 11mo agoI’m no ML engineer and far from an LLM expert. Just reading the article though it seemed to me that leveraging an SQL database here was a bigger issue than using traditional ML on the data, rather than the LLM being a win specifically. Just finding anything that was better suited than string matching on a RDBMS to the type of inputs seems like the natural conclusion when the complaint in the article itself was literally about SQL.
- datax2 11mo agoWarranty data is a great example of where LLMs have evolved bureaucratic data overhead. What most people do not know is because of US federal TREAD regulation Automotive companies (If they want to land and look at warranty data) need to review all warranty claims, document, and detect any safety related issues and issue recalls all with an strong auditability requirement. This problem generates huge data and operations overhead, Companies need to either hire 10's if not hundreds of individuals to inspect claims or come up with automation to make this process easier. Over the past couple of years people have made attempts with NLP (lets say standard ML workflows) but NLP and word temperature scores are hard to integrate into a reliable data pipeline much less a operational review workflow. Enter LLM's, the world is a data gurus oyster for building an detection system on warranty claims. Passing data to Prompted LLM's means capturing and classifying records becomes significantly easier, and these data applications can flow into more normal analytic work streams.
- jwong_ 11mo agoWish there was a bit more technical details in how the prompt iterations looked like. > We didn’t just replace a model. We replaced a process. That line sticks out so much now, and I can't unsee it.
- prasoonds 11mo agoRight? This one is also very clear ChatGPTese > That’s not a marginal improvement; it’s a different way of building classifiers. They've replaced an em-dash with a semi-colon.
- klabb3 11mo agoThey are really getting to the heart of the problem!
- Maxion 11mo agoYou're absolutely right! They didn't just replace an em dash with a colon, they invented a whole new way of speaking. /s if it wasn't obvious
- notanastronaut 11mo agoOne of the benefits of being immersed in model usage is being able to spot it in the wild from a mile away. People really hate when you catch them doing it and call them out for it.
- Der_Einzige 11mo agoAnd people like you will hate it even more when the normies immunize themselves from being obviously caught by such tells: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.15061 https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.15061
- spydum 11mo agoAh ha! But now the complete lack of emdash and bullet pointed lists from antislop will be the tell! Riposte!
- PaulHoule 11mo agoI'll note that they had a large annotated data set already that they were using to train and evaluate their own models. Once they decided to start testing LLMs it was straightforward for them to say "LLM 1 outperforms LLM 2" or "Prompt 3 outperforms Prompt 4". I'm afraid that people will draw the wrong conclusion from "We didn’t just replace a model. We replaced a process." and see it as an endorsement of the zero-shot-uber-alles "Prompt and Pray" approach that is dominant in the industry right now and the reason why an overwhelming faction of AI projects fail. If you can get good enough performance out of zero shot then yeah, zero shot is fine. Thing is that to know it is good enough you still have to collect and annotate more data than most people and organizations want to do.
- Aurornis 11mo ago> Thing is that to know it is good enough you still have to collect and annotate more data than most people and organizations want to do. This has been the bottleneck in every ML (not just text/LLM) project I’ve been part of. Not finding the right AI engineers. Not getting the MLops textbook perfect using the latest trends. It’s the collecting enough high quality data and getting it properly annotated and verified. Then doing proper evals with humans in the loop to get it right. People who only know these projects through headlines and podcasts really don’t like to accept this idea. Everyone wants synthetic data with LLMs doing the annotations and evals because they’ve been sold this idea that the AI will do everything for you, you just need to use it right. Then layer on top of that the idea that the LLMs can also write the code for you and it’s a mess when you have to deal with people who only gain their AI knowledge through headlines, LinkedIn posts, and podcasts.
- isoprophlex 11mo agoAmen brother. Working on a computer vision project right now, it's a wild success. This isn't my first CV project, but it's the most successful one. And that chiefly because my client pulled out their wallets and let an army of annotators create all the train data I asked for, and more.
- 11mo ago
- mcdonje 11mo agoI get that SQL text searches are miserable to write, but it would have flagged it properly in the example. The text says, "...no leaks..." The case statement says, "...AND LOWER(claim_text) NOT LIKE '%no leak%...'" It would've properly been marked as a "0".
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- _ea1k 11mo agoI thought the same. Having said that, the parenthesis in the example are really wrong for what they were trying to convey. I suspect that they built this sql sample for the document and made some mistakes in its generation. Perhaps I could say, it isn't just generated--it is also hallucinated!
- Aniket-N 11mo agoOnce you start to recognize AI written, rewritten or even edited articles, it’s hard to stop. It’s not X it’s Y. We didn’t just do A we did B. There’s definitely a lot of hard work that has gone in here. It’s gotten hard to read because of these sentence patterns popping up everywhere.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- StefanBatory 11mo agoTrue now. At the same time, as a nonnative speaker of English, this is literally how we were taught to write eye-catching articles and phrases. :P A lot of formulaic writing is what we were taught to do, especially with more formal things. (This is more of a sidenote to this example) So in a hunt for LLMs, we also get hit.
- Ancapistani 11mo agoI believe this is likely a consequence of how RLHF is done. I’ve not verified it, but I suspect the frontier model labs are outsourcing it to companies employing primarily non-native English speakers.
- StefanBatory 11mo agoBack in the days I've heard it's why delve is so popular; as it's common in Nigerian English. I learned it from MtG and I do believe it's a very cool word and I hate that I can't use it without people raising their eyebrows.
- Ancapistani 10mo agoI agree - “delve” is often a perfectly cromulent word :)
- esafak 11mo agoThe old model was capable of running on a CPU. The new one requires a GPU. This might be a consideration for some.
- PaulHoule 11mo agoHonda probably spends $100-$10,000 on a warranty claim in terms of technician time and parts. [1] Even at the low end they can afford to spend 10 cents on an LLM to analyze a claim. [1] specifically https://www.warrantyweek.com/archive/ww20230817.html https://www.warrantyweek.com/archive/ww20230817.html claims the expectation value of warranty claims for a car is around $650.
- Aurornis 11mo agoRunning big LLMs is expensive, but not nearly expensive as hiring people. Employees are very expensive, well beyond their wages that you see. Everything from employment taxes (employer paid) to hiring additional people to manage the people and their HR needs. Even if it took $10 to run everything to handle each request, that’s far cheaper than even a minimum wage employee when you consider all of the employment overhead.
- suddenlybananas 11mo agoI didn't read this very carefully so maybe I missed it, but I'm surprised they didn't try using a classifier on top of a BERT-style encoder model?
- DeathArrow 11mo agoTLDR: "old" ml techniques like XGBoost can beat LLMs and neural networks for some tasks.
- lmz 11mo ago...when given a 2 year head start.
- Workaccount2 11mo agoWould have been nice to have seen this done with the top models rather than something like Nova.
- cwmoore 11mo ago“hundreds, if not thousands…thousands”
- djoldman 11mo agoThree points to note: * "2 years vs 1 month" is a bit misleading because the work that enabled testing the 1 month of prompting was part of the 2 years of ML work. * xgboost is an ensemble method... add the llm outputs as inputs to xgboost and probably enjoy better results. * vectorize all the text data points using an embedding model and add those as inputs to xgboost for probably better results.
- elzbardico 11mo agoAnd yet, the source problem still remains. The company has a shitty way of reporting quality issues in relation to parts and assemblies. Being an automaker, I can almost smell the silos where data resides, the rigidly defended lines between manufactures, sales and post-sales, the intra-departmental political fights. Then you have all the legacy of enterprise software. And the result is this shitty warranty claims data.
- drob518 11mo agoSilos are the root of all evil.
- serjester 11mo agoAs someone that also worked at a large automakers, I think you’re making large, unfounded assumptions. Warranty data flows up from the technicians - good luck getting any auto technician to properly tag data. Their job is to fix a specific customer’s problem, not identify systematic issues. There’s a million things that make the data inherently messy. For example, a technician might replace 5 parts before they finally identify the root cause. Therefore, you need some sort of department to sit between millions of raw claims and engineering. I would be curious what kind of alternative you have in mind?
- robocat 11mo ago> cut-chip “cut-chip” usually describes a fault where the engine cuts out briefly—as if someone flicked the ignition off for a split second—and the driver hears or feels a little “chip” or sharp interruption in power.
- a-dub 11mo agointuitively it has seemed that these kinds of "fuzzy text search" applications are an area where llms really shine. it's cool to see evidence of it working. i'm curious about some kind of notion of "prompt overfitting." it's good to see the plots of improvement as the prompts change (although error bars probably would make sense here), but there's not much mention of hold out sets or other approaches to mitigate those concerns.
- juancn 11mo agoIt could have been done via topic analysis without an LLM. In fact there are companies such as Medallia which specialize in CX and have really strong classification solutions for specifically these use cases (plus all the generative AI stuff for closing the loop).
- nostrebored 11mo agoThe topic modeling of every major vendor, mostly awful LDA implementations, is horrendous. On the order of +/-20% absolute percentage points per topic. It would make my life easier if it weren’t so shit. As is, in every customer we have to go in and do legitimate topic modeling and taxonimization. Their AI implementations are also awful. Just sample 100 contacts with someone who actually understands the business and see their reaction.
- swyx 11mo agothe blog doesnt actually say the word "honda" anywhere on here. would probably advise that
- elmigranto 11mo agoOr you can have a single checkbox “Problem with the vehicle”.
- Gormanu 11mo ago[dead]
- shubham_zingle 11mo agodayumnnn, this is interesting to say the least
- w10-1 11mo agoIt's worth highlighting the conditions under which this can help: > in domains where the taxonomy drifts, the data is scarce, or the requirements shift faster than you can annotate It's not actually clear if warranty claims really meet these criteria. For warranty claims, the difficulty is in detecting false negatives, when companies have a strong incentive and opportunity to hide the negatives. Companies have been trusted to do this kind of market surveillance (auto warranties, drug post-market reporting) largely based on faith that the people involved would do so in earnest. That faith is misplaced when the process is automated (not because the implementors are less diligent, but because they are too removed to tell). Then the backlash to a few significant injuries might be a much worse regime of bureaucratic oversight, right when companies have replaced knowledge with automation (and replacement labor costs are high).
- greazy 11mo agoI found this fun fact really fascinating: > Translating French and Spanish claims into German first improved technical accuracy—an unexpected perk of Germany’s automotive dominance. It brings up an interesting idea that some languages are better suited for different domains.
- 1970-01-01 11mo agoSo you're still ignoring that problem of putting the oil filter in places that cause excessive spilled oil? The point of artificial intelligence is to quickly have an unbiased check of all signal within the noise.
- NumberCruncher 11mo agoIt would have been interesting to see how an Elasticsearch like system performs on this task.