zlacker

[return to "LLMs cannot find reasoning errors, but can correct them"]
1. ilaksh+Hm[view] [source] 2023-11-20 21:01:43
>>koie+(OP)
I was just testing Bard with some very simple coding exercises and it did well.

I noticed that they automatically create at least three other draft responses.

I assume that this is a technique that allows them to try multiple times and then select the best one.

Just mentioning it because it seems like another example of not strictly "zero-shot"ing a response. Which seems important for getting good results with these models.

I'm guessing they use batching for this. I wonder if it might become more common to run multiple inference subtasks for the same main task inside of a batch, for purposes of self-correcting agent swarms or something. The outputs from step one are reviewed by the group in step 2, then they try again in step 3.

I guess that only applies for a small department where there is frequently just one person using it at a time.

◧◩
2. stavro+Lt[view] [source] 2023-11-20 21:31:41
>>ilaksh+Hm
Isn't that textbook MoE?
◧◩◪
3. Tostin+rz[view] [source] 2023-11-20 21:57:05
>>stavro+Lt
No, like the other comment said, it's just using the `n` parameter in an OpenAI style API. For example, vLLM and llamacpp have support for it.
◧◩◪◨
4. stavro+2A[view] [source] 2023-11-20 22:00:23
>>Tostin+rz
Ah, it's the same model, multiple runs, then? Not actually N different models?
[go to top]