11–20 of 21 posts
I can't believe how much quicker it is to get to an optimal, comprehensive outcome using Beam. This is a groundbreaking way of interacting with LLMs.
I can't believe how much quicker it is to get to an optimal, comprehensive outcome using Beam. This is a groundbreaking way of interacting with LLMs.
Exactly my thought, as mentioned in the other thread, Chat's linear conversation style is not fit for reasoning/exploration type of tasks, while Beam's fan-out -> select --> merge is a much better and natural flow!
With Beam, we can easily experiment approaches such as Chain-Of-Though-with-Self-Consistency (CoT-SC) and other reasoning meta framework, but with more manual control. I always had issues using LLM's chat driven interface to figuring out/explore issues that i'm interested, since conversation/chats is always linear while reasoning/working on some ideas is structural. Beam seems to be a much better UX than the linear c…
With Beam, we can easily experiment approaches such as Chain-Of-Though-with-Self-Consistency (CoT-SC) and other reasoning meta framework, but with more manual control. I always had issues using LLM's chat driven interface to figuring out/explore issues that i'm interested, since conversation/chats is always linear while reasoning/working on some ideas is structural. Beam seems to be a much better UX than the linear c…
Yes, the only issue is the usage of tokens, which is obviously greater as we are sampling more of the solutions space. But it's a compromise to have GPT-4.5 level intelligence with GPT-4.
Huge fan, thank you for your hard work! This is ok outstanding!!