|
|
|
|
|
by joshstrange
893 days ago
|
|
I couldn’t agree more. I’ve hooked up things to my DB with AI in an attempt to “talk” to it but the results have been lackluster. Sure it’s impressive when it does get things right but I found myself spending a bunch of time adding to the prompt to explain how the data is organized. I’m not expecting any LLM to just understand it, heck another human would need the same rundown from me. Maybe it’s worth keeping this “documentation” up to date but my take away was that I couldn’t release access to the AI because it got things wrong too often and I could anticipate every question a user might ask. I didn’t want it to give out wrong answers (this DB is used for sales) since spitting out wrong numbers would be just as bad as my dashboards “lying”. Demo DBs aren’t representative of shipping applications and so the demos using AI are able to have an extremely high success rate. My DB, with deprecated columns, possibly confusing (to other people) naming, etc had a much higher error rate. |
|
How about a chat interface, where you correct the result and provide more contextual information about those columns?
Those chats could be later fed back to the model and ran a DPO optimisation on top