|
|
|
|
|
by danielmarkbruce
512 days ago
|
|
Conclusion: """
While current LLMs with BPE vocabularies lack
direct access to a token’s characters, they perform
well on some tasks requiring this information, but
perform poorly on others. The models seem to
understand the composition of their tokens in direct probing, but mostly fail to understand the concept of orthographic similarity. Their performance
on text manipulation tasks at the character level
lags far behind their performance at the word level.
LLM developers currently apply no methods which
specifically address these issues (to our knowledge), and so we recommend more research to
better master orthography. Character-level models
are a promising direction. With instruction tuning, they might provide a solution to many of the
shortcomings exposed by our CUTE benchmark
""" That is "having problems with spelling 'games'" and "probably better to use character level models for such tasks". Maybe you don't understand what "spelling games" are, here: https://chatgpt.com/share/67928128-9064-8002-ba4d-7ebc5edf07... |
|