lefttoreader

3 ms·

1.
by lefttoreader 3y ago
yikes. I was responding to them sidestepping the first commenter’s question.
2.
by lefttoreader 3y ago
Wait. So why not just contribute to an existing open source project if you’re going to implement an identical API? If you run your own models as a part of it, surely you could hook up your models as a backend to whatever abstractions you’re
3.
by lefttoreader 3y ago
I have some other comment on this thread where I point out why I don’t think it’s superficial. Would love to get your feedback on that if you feel like spending more time on this thread. But it’s not obscure? FlashText was a somewhat popula
4.
by lefttoreader 3y ago
Yep! But that’s sort of my point, and maybe this is just some misplaced academic shit of mine but if you’re going to write a paper then “easily had this idea and never discovered the paper” just doesn’t fly. Almost all academic work is deri
5.
by lefttoreader 3y ago
Your comment here doesn’t feel like it’s in good faith, but there’s a good chance I’m misreading it.
6.
by lefttoreader 3y ago
Sure! So it’s hopefully clear that the notion of constrained grammar is not novel (see every comment on here of people name-dropping their implementation from two months ago). The novelty here is “instead of checking whether every token is
7.
by lefttoreader 3y ago
The “trick” seems to blatantly rip off FlashText without citing it? https://arxiv.org/pdf/1711.00046.pdf I’m a fan of the approach. I normally wouldn’t care if this was just another LLM library taking inspiration, but