4 ms·
There is no RL for programming languages. Especially ones w/ no significant amount of code.
by measurablefunc 9mo ago
There is no RL for programming languages. Especially ones w/ no significant amount of code.
- whimsicalism 9mo agonot even wrong
- measurablefunc 9mo agoExactly.
- nl 9mo agoI guess the op was implying that is something fixable fairly easily? (Which is true - it's easy to prompt your LLM with the language grammar, have it generate code and then RL on that) Easy in the sense of "it is only having enough GPUs to RL a coding capable LLM" anyway.
- measurablefunc 9mo agoIf you can generate code from the grammar then what exactly are you RLing? The point was to generate code in the first place so what does backpropagation get you here?
- nl 9mo agoPost RL you won't need to put the grammar in the prompt anymore.
- measurablefunc 9mo agoThe grammar of this language is no more than a few hundred tokens (thousands at worst) & current LLMs support context windows in the millions of tokens.
- nl 9mo agoSure. The point is that your statement about the ability to do RL is wrong. Additionally your response to the Deepseek paper in the other subthread shows profound and deliberate ignorance.
- measurablefunc 9mo agoTheorycrafting is very easy. Not a single person in this thread has shown any code to do what they're suggesting. You have access to the best models & yet you still haven't managed to prompt it to give you the code to prove your point so spare me any further theoretical responses. Either show the code to do exactly what you're saying is possible or admit you lack the relevant understanding to back up your claims.
- nl 9mo ago> You have access to the best models & yet you still haven't managed to prompt it to give you the code to prove your point so spare me any further theoretical responses. Either show the code to do exactly what you're saying is possible GPU poor here though... To quote someone (you...) on the internet: > More generally, don't ask random people on the internet to do work for you for free. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46689232 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46689232
- measurablefunc 9mo agoClaims require evidence & if you are unwilling to present it then admit you do not have any evidence to support your claims. It's not complicated. Either RL works & you have evidence or you do not know & can not claim that it works w/o first doing the required due diligence which (shockingly) actually requires work instead of empty theory crafting & hand waving.
- thorum 9mo agoGo read the DeepSeek R1 paper
- measurablefunc 9mo agoWhy would I do that? If you know something then quote the relevant passage & equation that says you can train code generators w/ RL on a novel language w/ little to no code to train on. More generally, don't ask random people on the internet to do work for you for free.
- thorum 9mo agoYour other comment sounded like you were interested in learning about how AI labs are applying RL to improve programming capability. If so, the DeepSeek R1 paper is a good introduction to the topic (maybe a bit out of date at this point, but very approachable). RL training works fine for low resource languages as long as you have tooling to verify outputs and enough compute to throw at the problem.
- whimsicalism 9mo agoimo generally not worth it to keep going when you encounter this sort of HN archetype
- measurablefunc 9mo agoSo you should have no problem bringing up the exact passages & equations they use for their policies.
- whimsicalism 9mo agowell, that’s one way to react to being provided with interesting reading material.
- measurablefunc 9mo agoBring up passage that supports your claim. I'll wait.