|
|
|
|
|
|
by dr_zoidberg
1977 days ago
|
|
|
> I’m getting a bit tired of these overhyped cherry-picked samples with seemingly nothing solid to ever back it up. Most of the times a "fantastic GPT-3 result" is shown, you have to dig a bit and then you'll find out how it was primed[0] and how many different texts they had it generate. Then the one(s) carrying out the experiment go on and pick the most shocking writings. If you read all of the outputs (there are a few articles around that show you 5 or 6 different outputs) you'll see the variations that it took duing those. I understand that 5 or 6 is actually small, to get shocking results they usually go into de dozens of tries. [0] usually the priming phrases are given, but depending on how much of a snake-oil-salesman the person writing/giving a talk is, they may even hide this part |
|
|