|
|
|
|
|
|
by gharman
1036 days ago
|
|
|
Agreed there is a semantic argument here. I don’t think anyone is anthropomorphizing LLMs. I’ve had to adopt “objective” with one customer instead of “task” (my preferred default term) because their industry overloads “task” with something else. Now that said, as you point out, the real objective is next token prediction not “help the user with a truth bomb.” and it just happens to have emergent accidental usefulness (I think a natural bias from the training data). They (chatgpt et al) do move closer to “clear and coherent” by adding extra layers such as a beam search on LLM outputs. Good to remember that ChatGPT et al are products, not bare metal LLMs. |
|
|
The "AI" marketeers' use of "hallucinate", "objective" and "predict" does precisely that.