|
|
|
|
|
by SonOfLilit
6 days ago
|
|
Is there any evidence that would change your mind? The wiki "ablation" article you yourself linked dedicates a section to explain "abliteration". Googling abliteration arxiv yields at least one page of papers that mention it in the abstract (all but one in the title too). I counted 9 unique papers. If it was shown that all of these were posted after this discussion started, or by people related to the person you tried to correct, I would be convinced that abliteration is not a real word. But evidence keeps pointing otherwise, nnd you keep arguing with evidence that proves "ablate" is a word (to which we all agree), not evedence that proves "abliterate" isn't. You did show evidence that it's a pretty new word (of course it is! it's a pretty new technique in a field that didn't exist before the first open source RLHF'd models were released in '23!), and indeed, this (different) wiktionary page contains its origin story from '24: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/abliterate#English |
|