If I pay for the chain of thought, I want to see the chain of thought. Simple. How would I know if it happened at all? Trust OpenAI? LOL
Easy solution - don't pay!
That's a chain of thought, right there!
Learning to Reason with LLMs
961–970 of 1001 posts
Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs
#962Earlier quoted context omitted.
People have been celebrating the fact that tokens got 100x cheaper and now here's a new system that will use 100x more tokens.
If it 's reasoning correctly, it shouldnt need a lot of tokens because you don't need to correct it. You only need to ask it to solve nuclear fusion once.
Imagine if this tech was available in the middle ages and it was asked to 'solve' alchemy or perpetual motion, and responded that it was an impossible problem... people would (irrationally from our perspective) go Luddite on it I suspect. Now apply to the 'fusion power' problem.
Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs
#963Some practical notes from digging around in their documentation: In order to get access to this, you need to be on their tier 5 level, which requires $1,000 total paid and 30+ days since first successful payment. Pricing is $15.00 / 1M input tokens and $60.00 / 1M output tokens. Context window is 128k token, max output is 32,768 tokens. There is also a mini version with double the maximum output tokens (65,536 tokens…
So, basically, it's chain of thought as a service? Not a model, per se, but a service that chains multiple model requests behind the scene?
Who knows? Certainly not the public.
It might be a finetuned model that works better in such a setting.
Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs
#964If I pay for the chain of thought, I want to see the chain of thought. Simple. How would I know if it happened at all? Trust OpenAI? LOL
how do you know it isn't some guy typing responses to you when you use openAI?
Well if they are paying real people to answer my questions I would call that a pretty good deal. That's exactly my point. As a user I don't care how they come up with it. That's not my problem. I just care about the content. If I pay a human for logical reasoning, train of thought type of stuff, I expect them to lay it out for me. Not just give me the conclusion, but how they came to it.
Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs
#965I have also heard they are launching a AI called strawberry. If you pay attention, there is a specific reason why they have named it strawberry. if you ask chat gpt 4o, how many r's in the word strawberry, it will give answer as 2.
still to this day it will answer same. the model is not able to reason.
thats why a reasoning model is being launched. this is one of the reason apart from many other reasons.
Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs
#966Some practical notes from digging around in their documentation: In order to get access to this, you need to be on their tier 5 level, which requires $1,000 total paid and 30+ days since first successful payment. Pricing is $15.00 / 1M input tokens and $60.00 / 1M output tokens. Context window is 128k token, max output is 32,768 tokens. There is also a mini version with double the maximum output tokens (65,536 tokens…
Reasoning tokens are indeed billed as output tokens. > While reasoning tokens are not visible via the API, they still occupy space in the model's context window and are billed as output tokens. From here: https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/reasoning
No access to reasoning output seems totally bonkers. All of the real cost is in inference, assembling an HTTP request to deliver that result seems trivial?
Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs
#967Feels like a lot of commenters here miss the difference between just doing chain-of-thought prompting, and what is happening here, which is learning a good chain of thought strategy using reinforcement learning. "Through reinforcement learning, o1 learns to hone its chain of thought and refine the strategies it uses." When looking at the chain of thought (COT) in the examples, you can see that the model employs diffe…
[deleted]
Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs
#968Maybe this is improvement in some areas, still I got spurious reasoning and inability to connect three simple facts: Yes, "el presente acta de nacimiento" is correct in Spanish. Explanation: "Acta" is a feminine noun that begins with a stressed "a" sound. In Spanish, when a feminine singular noun starts with a stressed "a" or "ha", the definite article "la" is replaced with "el" to facilitate pronunciation. However,…
Native Spanish speaker here. No, it isn't. When a word stays in the middle of 'La' plus a noun starting with 'a', the cacophony is null now, thus, you can perfectly use (if not mandatory) "la presente acta". Proof: https://www.elcastellano.org/francisco-jos%C3%A9-d%C3%ADaz-%...
yes, exactly - this is my point
Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs
#969Sounds great, but so does their "new flagship model that can reason across audio, vision, and text in real time" announced in May. [0] [0] https://openai.com/index/hello-gpt-4o/
Yep, all these AI announcements from big companies feel like promises for the future rather than immediate solutions. I miss the days when you could actually use a product right after it was announced, instead of waiting for some indefinite "coming soon."
As an entrepreneur, I do this often. In order to sleep better at night, I explain to myself that it’s somewhat harmless to give teasers about future content releases. If someone buys my product based on future promises or speculation, they’re investing into the development and my company’s future.
Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs
#970"Learn to reason like a robot"