4 ms·
Because it will take you years to read all the information you can get funneled through an LLM in a day
by mgraczyk 7mo ago
Because it will take you years to read all the information you can get funneled through an LLM in a day
- 20k 7mo agoExcept you have no idea if what the LLM is telling you is true I do a lot of astrophysics. Universally LLMs are wrong about nearly every astrophysics questions I've asked them - even the basic ones, in every model I've ever tested. Its terrifying that people take these at face value For research at a PhD level, they have absolutely no idea what's going on. They just make up plausible sounding rubbish
- mgraczyk 7mo agoSomehow we went from writing software apps and reading API docs to research level astrophysics Sure it's not there yet. Give it a few months
- 20k 7mo agoIt doesn't even work for basic astrophysics I asked chatgpt the other day: "Where did elements heavier than iron come from?" The answer it gave was totally wrong. Its not a hard question. I asked it this question again today, and some of it was right (!). This is such a low bar for basic questions
- cdetrio 7mo agoAstrophysicist David Kipping had a podcast episode a month ago reporting that LLMs are working shockingly well for him, as well as for the faculty at the IAS.[1] It's curious how different people come to very different conclusions about the usefulness of LLMs. https://youtu.be/PctlBxRh0p4 https://youtu.be/PctlBxRh0p4
- 20k 7mo agoThe problem with these long videos is that what I really want to see is what questions were asked of it, and the accuracy of the results Every time I ask LLMs questions I know the answers to, its results are incomplete, inaccurate, or just flat out wrong much of the time The idea that AI is an order of magnitude superior to coders is flat out wrong as well. I don't know who he's talking to