Give it reward and punishment evaluations, exploring the noise in parallel, extinction for the non rewarding answers ?
Chain of Recursive Thoughts: Make AI think harder by making it argue with itself
161–170 of 253 posts
Re: Chain of Recursive Thoughts: Make AI think harder by making it argue with itself
#162Something I do sometimes is: - Have an AI chat model come up with an answer to a problem. - Have it write a report discussing the details of the problem and why it's answer is correct, directed at a person or AI model who has no knowledge of the initial problem or technical field. - Have a second AI model with no knowledge of the problem grade the report, and write it's own report either (a) asking for clarification…
For anything semi-adversarial, I have had good results asking the AI to come up with a plan, then take the side of the opponent coming with counter play/way to defeat the plan, finally asking for a revision of the initial plan given the potential reaction from the opponent. The final plan you obtain is generally a lot more well rounded and thought out. I find that amusing because the technique also works when I apply…
To be honest, this is what I assumed this repo was doing from the title. It talks about arguing with itself, but it looks like it's just generating multiple alternative responses in parallel and selecting the best one.
Do you find your method handles "sycophancy" well?
Re: Chain of Recursive Thoughts: Make AI think harder by making it argue with itself
#163I kind of want to try something like this at a larger scale in an always-on mode where I have a 'senate' of debate. Rather than responding to prompts on a case by case basis, provide a list of tasks (potentially with deadlines) and let the senate work on them, break off into groups to manage subtasks, challenge results , make suggestions. Even potentially a tree of analysts where suggestions only gets passed up the t…
In doing some DevOps-y type tasks recently (ansible, packer, docker, baking images with guestfish), I've found it very frustrating how much ChatGPT will confidently tell me to use flags on tools that don't exist, or hallicinate completely non-existent functions or behaviours. And then when I spend time trying what it suggests only to hit a wall and come back like wtf mate it breezily goes "oh yes so you're right, goo…
Cursor has a neat feature where you can upload custom docs, and then reference them with @Docs. I find this prevents hallucinations, and also using a reasoning model
Re: Chain of Recursive Thoughts: Make AI think harder by making it argue with itself
#164Question: has the the adversarial approach been roled into any coding copilots/assistant frameworks?
Costs of various kinds aside I've wanted that from assistance's inception — with precisely the features many call out and home-roll here, difference by both model/provider, and, "role"...
It seems like if you have the money/compute to burn, and can live with the reasoning wall-clock time,
this has got to be the best approach for the foreseeable future, for a lot of specific requirements.
(I also have wondered if this would illuminate the edges of what modern production models are capable of, "aggregating and integrating" over a variety of contributions might make more clear what the limits of their abilities are.)
Re: Chain of Recursive Thoughts: Make AI think harder by making it argue with itself
#165This sounds like the zeitgeist is approaching genetic algorithms, which are super fun. Adversarial stuff is great.
Re: Chain of Recursive Thoughts: Make AI think harder by making it argue with itself
#166The modern Alchemy: the belief that you can extract gold (intelligence) from iron (autocomplete by imitation) by mixing iron with itself.
Re: Chain of Recursive Thoughts: Make AI think harder by making it argue with itself
#167I feel like itd be cool to try prompts based on an adversarial justice system… attorney agents arguing both sides, a judge ruling on “the law”—adherence to instructions etc
That's very easy to do. A prompt I regularly use is a "council" system. For example: "I believe I have been contacted by the supernatural. Here are the details . Please form a council of seven people: 1) Secular scientist 2) Religious scientist 3) Paranormal historian 4) Secular Psychologist 5) Religious psychologist 6) Carl Jung 7) Richard Dawkins. The council should all be independent and provide their own objectiv…
Wow, that's a very cool prompt, I haven't tried anything like that before.
Re: Chain of Recursive Thoughts: Make AI think harder by making it argue with itself
#168Better yet, let it argue with another AI, preferably using voice; instant entertainment.
Re: Chain of Recursive Thoughts: Make AI think harder by making it argue with itself
#169Something I do sometimes is: - Have an AI chat model come up with an answer to a problem. - Have it write a report discussing the details of the problem and why it's answer is correct, directed at a person or AI model who has no knowledge of the initial problem or technical field. - Have a second AI model with no knowledge of the problem grade the report, and write it's own report either (a) asking for clarification…
I've wondered if it might be helpful to randomly "shard" training data between two LLMs; just feed half the training data to one, and the rest to the other, with no overlap.
So instead of using two models, you'd be making two halves of one model do a similar (deliberative) process to yours. I wonder if that would result in a benefit over a single model with the full training set, and if you could continue to do the same thing by sharding the shards.
Re: Chain of Recursive Thoughts: Make AI think harder by making it argue with itself
#170Something I do sometimes is: - Have an AI chat model come up with an answer to a problem. - Have it write a report discussing the details of the problem and why it's answer is correct, directed at a person or AI model who has no knowledge of the initial problem or technical field. - Have a second AI model with no knowledge of the problem grade the report, and write it's own report either (a) asking for clarification…
Ah, now we know why Spain was out of electricity yesterday.