[crazygringo]

> If a company makes a significantly better model, shouldn't it be able to explain how it's better to any competitor?

No. Not if it's not trained on any materials that reveal the secret sauce on why it's better.

LLM's don't possess introspection into their own training process or architecture.

[harrisi]

That's my point. Anything that could exist that's significantly "better" would be able to share more about its creation. And anything that could be significantly better would have to be capable of "understanding" things it wasn't trained on.

[crazygringo]

That's not true. There are a million ways to be "significantly better" that don't involve knowledge about the model's creation. It can be 10x or 100x or 1000x more accurate at coding, for example, without knowing a single thing more about its own internal training methodology.

[Smaug123]

Could you share anything about your creation, without having been to school where we taught you what the answers were? Can you deduce the existence of your hippocampus just by thinking really hard?