921–930 of 1001 posts
AI professor here. I know this page is a joke, but in the interest of accuracy, a terminological comment: we don't call it a "hallucination" if a model complies exactly with what a prompt asked for and produces a prediction, exactly as requested. Rater, "hallucinations" are spurious replacements of factual knowledge with fictional material caused by the use of statistical process (the pseudo random number generator u…
There are AI professors out there already!
I posted something similar from Grok 9 months ago, although it was “flagged” for some reason. the link still works. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43260083
the actual link on the HN page doesn't work though
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If the LLM is accurately reflecting the training corpus, it wouldn’t be considered a hallucination. The LLM is operating as designed. That would mean that there is never any hallucination. The point of original comment was distinguishing between fact and fiction, which an LLM just cannot do. (It's an unsolved problem among humans, which spills into the training data)
> That would mean that there is never any hallucination. No it wouldn’t. If the LLM produces an output that does not match the training data or claims things that are not in the training data due to pseudorandom statistical processes then that’s a hallucination. If it accurately represents the training data or context content, it’s not a hallucination. Similarly, if you request that an LLM tells you something false a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First let’s have it create maybe 100 more entries, then have people vote on which are the best 30, THEN put all the effort into creating all the fake articles and discussions. As good as the current 30 are, maybe the set could still be made twice as good. And have a set of short “explain xkcd”-style entries somewhere so people can read up on what the joke is, when they miss a specific one. Then send it to The Onion a…
That one's a bit optimistic for the FDA. But it nailed fusion and Gary Marcus lesssgoo
AI professor here. I know this page is a joke, but in the interest of accuracy, a terminological comment: we don't call it a "hallucination" if a model complies exactly with what a prompt asked for and produces a prediction, exactly as requested. Rater, "hallucinations" are spurious replacements of factual knowledge with fictional material caused by the use of statistical process (the pseudo random number generator u…
I agree with your first paragraph, but not your second. Models can still hallucinate when temperature is set to zero (aka when we always choose the highest probability token from the model's output token distribution). In my mind, hallucination is when some aspect of the model's response should be consistent with reality but is not, and the reality-inconsistent information is not directly attributable or deducible fr…
By "reality", do you mean the training corpus? Because otherwise, this seems like a strange standard. Models don't have access to "reality".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We don't know if anything knows anything because we don't know what knowing is.
This is just something that sounds profound but really isn’t. Knowing is actually the easiest part to define and explain. Intelligence / understanding is much more difficult to define.
... To that end, I'd love to be able to revisit my classes from back then (computer science, philosophy (two classes from a double major), and a smattering of linguistics) with the world state of today's technologies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Hallucination" has always seemed like a misnomer to me anyway considering LLMs don't know anything. They just impressively get things right enough to be useful assuming you audit the output. If anything, I think all of their output should be called a hallucination.
Others have suggested "bullshit". A bullshitter does not care (and may not know) whether what they say is truth or fiction. A bullshitter's goal is just to be listened to and seem convincing.
Exactly half of these HN usernames actually exist. So either there are enough people on HN that follow common conventions for Gemini to guess from a more general distribution, or Gemini has memorized some of the more popular posters. The ones that are missing: - aphyr_bot - bio_hacker - concerned_grandson - cyborg_sec - dang_fan - edge_compute - founder_jane - glasshole2 - monad_lover - muskwatch - net_hacker - oldti…