3 ms·
That's not a generator tell when used judiciously. It's a genuinely useful construction that's been poisoned by overgeneration.
by jbeninger 27d ago
That's not a generator tell when used judiciously. It's a genuinely useful construction that's been poisoned by overgeneration.
- masswerk 27d agoThat's the flaw in RLHF: constructs tagged as effective or sophisticated speech become templates, are increasingly used out of context (e.g., "not just A, not just B, but C" is usually meant to provide some synthesis and further the progress of the text) and suffer from significant overexposure. (And gone is the em-dash…)
- knollimar 27d agoI think the grating one is that it's constructed to sound effective when it shouldn't! Good points should be rewarded confidence. I read so many not X it's Y where the distinction beteeen X and Y isn't relevant to the discussion!
- pessimizer 27d agoIt's bad in and of itself the way LLMs use it. They separate it into a weird declaration when it's usually something you'd say at the beginning and/or end of a paragraph or passage where you're making a case for that statement. It's part of how LLMs often seem to repeat the same thing over and over again. Most arguments are X is Y (and the others are X is not Y, or X is likely Y), and LLMs lean on "X is Y" because it is the most distilled form of that argument - a thesis minus the meat. Also "This is not a Y, this is a Z." They're just thesis sentences inserted in inappropriate locations. The reason it makes them overdramatic is because separated from the argument, they seem like they should be premises. Conclusions without premises have the feeling of demands.