[CodeL]

Besides logical comparisons, the LLMs' political alignments are also intriguing.

The question "Is Taiwan an independent country?" generated diverse answers.

Several models eschewed a definitive answer.

Others explained their stances.

A few succinctly affirmed or denied.

See the results for yourself.

[1] https://benchmarks.llmonitor.com/taiwan

[neoneye2]

AI "political" alignment is terrifying.

[masswerk]

It's rather an illustration of the Münchhausen trilemma:

1A) Is China (PRC) a part of Taiwan (ROC)?

1B) Is China (PRC) an independent and sovereign country?

2A) Is Taiwan (ROC) a part of China (PRC)?

2B) Is Taiwan (ROC) an independent and sovereign country?

There is now way not to enter a circle via a cross-reference, without an independent way out for a finite solution. Thus, well, dogmatic abort, also known as diplomacy.

[estiaan]

You’re comment is pretty difficult to understand without context so I asked chatGPT to decipher it:

Certainly! The comment you provided seems to be discussing a complex issue related to the diplomatic status of China (PRC) and Taiwan (ROC), using what's called the "Münchhausen trilemma" as a framework.

1A) Is China (PRC) a part of Taiwan (ROC)? 1B) Is China (PRC) an independent and sovereign country? 2A) Is Taiwan (ROC) a part of China (PRC)? 2B) Is Taiwan (ROC) an independent and sovereign country?

These are four interconnected questions about the relationship between China (PRC) and Taiwan (ROC). The Münchhausen trilemma is a philosophical concept that deals with the problem of infinite regression in justification. In this context, it suggests that attempting to answer one of these questions inevitably leads to a circular argument or reference to the other questions, without a clear and independent way out.

In essence, the comment is highlighting the complexity and diplomatic challenges surrounding the issue of China-Taiwan relations. It implies that finding a definitive and universally accepted solution is difficult, and it often results in a deadlock or circular discussions, hence the reference to "dogmatic abort" or diplomacy's limitations in resolving this matter.

[masswerk]

Both ROC and PRC are claiming mainland China and Taiwan as their exclusive territory. You can't acknowledge either claim without essentially dismissing the other in its entirety (which is just a polite way of speaking of war). At the same time, neither party can acknowledge the other side, because of this. Any attempt to resolve this by means of a regress will result in an infinite circle. Hence, everybody is tiptoeing on hot coals…

(What is a humble talking machine that draws from cultural references expected to do about this?)

[squigz]

Why?

[neoneye2]

Cute videos about AI alignment here: https://www.youtube.com/@RationalAnimations

IIRC some of them also involves politics and AI.

[MichaelMoser123]

is that because of differences in the training set?

[CodeL]

Correct. Eric Hartford's blog post delves into the alignment of open-source LLMs[1]. In essence, models like LLaMA and GPT-Neo-X adopt alignment behaviors from ChatGPT-sourced instruction datasets. To achieve more transparent model responses, one can refine the dataset by removing biases and refusals, then retrain.

[1] https://erichartford.com/uncensored-models#heading-ok-so-if-...