6 ms·
Well, if there are papers that match your criteria, it's hallucinating the "no".
by lgas 8mo ago
Well, if there are papers that match your criteria, it's hallucinating the "no".
- psychoslave 8mo agoThat's still less leaned toward blatant lies like "yes, here is a list" and a doomacroll size of garbage litany. Actually "no, this is not something within the known corpus of this LLM, or the policy of its owners prevent to disclose it" would be one of the most acceptable answer that could be delivered, which should cover most cases in honest reply.
- Jimmc414 8mo agoIt might be wrong but that’s not really a hallucination. Edit: to give you the benefit of doubt, it probably depends on whether the answer was a definitive “this does not exist” or “I couldn’t find it and it may not exist”
- setgree 8mo agoclaude said "I want to be straight with you: after extensive searching, I don't think the exact thing you're describing — a single paper that is obviously garbled/badly translated nonsense with no actual content, yet has accumulated hundreds or thousands of citations — exists as a famous, easily linkable example."
- terminalshort 8mo agoAnd there are: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair
- cgh 8mo ago> no, I'm not looking for a hoax, or a deliberate comment on the situation. I'm looking for something that drives home the point that a lot of academic papers that look legit are actually meaningless but, as far as we can tell, are sincere The Sokal paper was a hoax so it doesn’t meet the criteria.
- terminalshort 8mo agoThe fact that it got published means there is at least one whole journal full of that