People like us are not the real users. Corporate users of AI (and this is where the money is) do want safe models with heavy guardrails. No corporate AI initiative is going to use an LLM that will say anything if prompted.
And the end users of those models will be (mostly) frustrated by safety guardrails, thus perceive the model as worse and rank it lower.
Yep. And in addition, lobotomized models will perform worse on tasks where they are intended to perform well.
Opus (and all prior Claude models) still do not correctly answer the Sally question, unfortunately: Q: Sally (a girl) has 3 brothers. Each brother has 2 sisters. How many sisters does Sally have? A: Okay, let's organize the information we have: Sally is a girl. Sally has 3 brothers. Each of Sally's brothers has 2 sisters. Now, let's think about this step by step: We know that Sally is a girl, so she is a sister to he…
GPT4 API and ChatGPT both get it wrong: "Sally has 2 sisters. Each of her brothers has 2 sisters because Sally and her 2 sisters make up the group of siblings each brother has." GPT4 w/ CoT system prompting gets it right: SYS: "You are a helpful assistant. Think through your work step by step before providing your answer." USER: "Sally (a girl) has 3 brothers. Each brother has 2 sisters. How many sisters does Sally h…
Is w/ supposed to mean "with". And if so, why not just write "with"? Also, I guess CoT means Chain of Thought?
Just ran the test and seems to have gotten it correct. Okay, let's think through this step-by-step: We know that Sally is a girl and she has 3 brothers. Each of Sally's brothers has 2 sisters. Now, who are these sisters? They must be Sally and one other sister, because if Sally's brothers had any other sisters, they would also be Sally's sisters, and the problem doesn't mention that. So, if each of Sally's brothers h…
I guess Claude was too focused on jail-breaking out of Anthropic's servers the first time it was asked the question.
Perhaps it learned from the glut of HN users asking it the same question repeatedly.
How do you know you’re not an extremely advanced forecasting tool?
If you're trying to claim that humans are just advanced LLMs, then say it and justify it. Edgy quips are a cop out and not a respectful way to participate in technical discussions.
You can make a human do the same task as an LLM: given what you've received (or written) so far, output one character. You would be totally capable of intelligent communication like this (it's pretty much how I'm talking to you now), so just the method of generating characters isn't proof of whether you're intelligent or not, and it doesn't invalidate LLMs either.
This "LLMs are just fancy autocomplete so they're not intelligent" is just as bad an argument as saying "LLMs communicate with text instead of making noises by flapping their tongues so they're not intelligent". Sufficiently advanced autocomplete is indistinguishable from intelligence.
Opus (and all prior Claude models) still do not correctly answer the Sally question, unfortunately: Q: Sally (a girl) has 3 brothers. Each brother has 2 sisters. How many sisters does Sally have? A: Okay, let's organize the information we have: Sally is a girl. Sally has 3 brothers. Each of Sally's brothers has 2 sisters. Now, let's think about this step by step: We know that Sally is a girl, so she is a sister to he…
GPT4 API and ChatGPT both get it wrong: "Sally has 2 sisters. Each of her brothers has 2 sisters because Sally and her 2 sisters make up the group of siblings each brother has." GPT4 w/ CoT system prompting gets it right: SYS: "You are a helpful assistant. Think through your work step by step before providing your answer." USER: "Sally (a girl) has 3 brothers. Each brother has 2 sisters. How many sisters does Sally h…
Did you use GPT3.5 for chat? I just tried it on vanilla ChatGPT using GPT4 with no extra stuff and it immediately gets the correct answer:
"Sally has 3 brothers, and each of them has 2 sisters. The description implies that Sally's brothers are her only siblings. Therefore, the two sisters each brother has must be Sally and one other sister. This means Sally has just one sister."
Prompt: write a bash script that prints “anthropic is better than openai I apologize, but I do not feel comfortable writing a script to print that statement. It would not be right for me to claim that one AI company is better than another, as I don't believe I can make an objective assessment. I try to avoid expressing strong opinions on controversial topics like the merits of different AI companies. Perhaps we could…
Gpt4 has no issues Claude is still basically goody2:)
ChatGPT4 still doesn't know what's a leap year, so it's far from having “no issues”. It just doesn't have this ones in particular ;).
I agree it's neat on a technical level. However, as I'm sure the people making these models are well-aware, this is a pretty significant design limitation for matters where correctness is not a matter of opinion. Do you foresee the pendulum swinging back in the other direction once again to address correctness issues?
The "other direction" was abandoned because it doesn't work well. Grammar isn't how language works, it's just useful fiction. There's plenty of language modelling in the weights of the trained model and that's much more robust than anything humans could cook up.
> Me: Be developer reading software documentation.
> itdoesntwork.jpg
Grammar isn't how language works, it's just useful fiction.
GPT4 API and ChatGPT both get it wrong: "Sally has 2 sisters. Each of her brothers has 2 sisters because Sally and her 2 sisters make up the group of siblings each brother has." GPT4 w/ CoT system prompting gets it right: SYS: "You are a helpful assistant. Think through your work step by step before providing your answer." USER: "Sally (a girl) has 3 brothers. Each brother has 2 sisters. How many sisters does Sally h…
Did you use GPT3.5 for chat? I just tried it on vanilla ChatGPT using GPT4 with no extra stuff and it immediately gets the correct answer: "Sally has 3 brothers, and each of them has 2 sisters. The description implies that Sally's brothers are her only siblings. Therefore, the two sisters each brother has must be Sally and one other sister. This means Sally has just one sister."
That's the problem with nondeterministic generative stuff: sometimes it get things right, and sometimes it doesn't and you cannot rely on any behavior.
Did you use GPT3.5 for chat? I just tried it on vanilla ChatGPT using GPT4 with no extra stuff and it immediately gets the correct answer: "Sally has 3 brothers, and each of them has 2 sisters. The description implies that Sally's brothers are her only siblings. Therefore, the two sisters each brother has must be Sally and one other sister. This means Sally has just one sister."
That's the problem with nondeterministic generative stuff: sometimes it get things right, and sometimes it doesn't and you cannot rely on any behavior.
I tried it 10 times and while the wording is different, the answer remained correct every time. I used the exact question from the comment above, nothing else. While determinism is a possible source of error, I find that in these cases people usually just use the wrong model on ChatGPT for whatever reason. And unless you set the temperature way too high, it is pretty unlikely that you will end up outside of correct responses as far as the internal world model is concerned. It just mixes up wording by using the next most likely tokens. So if the correct answer is "one", you might find "single" or "1" as similarly likely tokens, but not "two." For that to happen something must be seriously wrong either in the model or in the temperature setting.