You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
157 points

LLMs: using statistics to generate reasonable-sounding wrong answers from bad data.

permalink
report
reply
0 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points

Often the answers are pretty good. But you never know if you got a good answer or a bad answer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
52 points

And the system doesn’t know either.

For me this is the major issue. A human is capable of saying “I don’t know”. LLMs don’t seem able to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

Accurate.

No matter what question you ask them, they have an answer. Even when you point out their answer was wrong, they just have a different answer. There’s no concept of not knowing the answer, because they don’t know anything in the first place.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

With proper framework, decent assertions are possible.

  1. It must cite the source and provide the quote, not just a summary.
  2. An adversarial review must be conducted

If that is done, the work on the human is very low.

That said, it’s STILL imperfect, but this is leagues better than one shot question and answer

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Except LLMs don’t store sources.

They don’t even store sentences.

It’s all a stack of massive N-dimensional probability spaces roughly encoding the probabilities of certain tokens (which are mostly but not always words) appearing after groups of tokens in a certain order.

And all of that to just figure out “what’s the most likely next token”, an output which is then added to the input and fed into it again to get the next word and so on, producing sentences one word at a time.

Now, if you feed it as input a long, very precise sentence taken from a unique piece, maybe you’re luck and it will output the correct next word, but if you already have all that you don’t really need an LLM to give you the rest.

Maybe the “framework” you seek - which is quite akin to a indexer with a natural language interface - can be made with AI, but it’s not something you can do with LLMs because their structure is entirely unsuited for it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

They really aren’t. Go ask about something in your area of expertise. At first glance, everything will look correct and in order, but the more you read the more it turns out to be complete bullshit. It’s good at getting broad strokes but the details are very often wrong.

Now imagine someone that doesn’t have your expertise reading that answer. They won’t recognize those details are wrong until it’s too late.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

That is about the experience I have. I asked it for factual information in the field I work at. It didn’t gave correct answers. Or, it gave working protocols which were strange and would not be successful.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Sounds familiar. Citation please

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 18K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.1K

    Posts

  • 91K

    Comments