3 ms·
> An agent doing a task with 1 example is one shot. An agent doing a task with a few examples is few shot. I don't think you are correctly using these terms Th
by nl 2mo ago
> An agent doing a task with 1 example is one shot. An agent doing a task with a few examples is few shot. I don't think you are correctly using these terms
This is a different thing. Yes, giving multiple example is called "few-shot prompting".
But one-shot vs few-shot benchmarking is different. In this context "one-shot" means "pass at 1 effort" as opposed to "multi-shot". In the literature this is called "pass@k".
Anthropic has a good explanation here: https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/demystifying-evals-for-ai-agents https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/demystifying-evals-for... (search for "pass@k").
In this discussion we are discussing pass@1 (single shot) vs pass@(k>1) (multi shot).
> The multiple back to back LLM calls are done on accumulating context, so if there is a sampling error it could throw the entire session out of whack, because LLM's build on the previous context.
This isn't really true. In an agentic loop the LLM can correct itself via in-context learning.
- computerex 2mo agoYes, and the reason why pass@k exists is because of self-consistency. There is no guarantee for right answer to be selected or for the LLM to correct itself. While I agree pass@1 is a useful metric, I'd be more interested to know pass@5 so I can better compare the results.