Comment by concats

Comment by concats 12 hours ago

3 replies

That's a clickbait title.

What they are actually saying: Given one correct quoted sentence, the model has 42% chance of predicting the next sentence correctly.

So, assuming you start with the first sentence and tell it to keep going, it has a 0.42^n odds of staying on track, where n is the n-th sentence.

It seems to me, that if they didn't keep correcting it over and over again with real quotes, it wouldn't even get to the end of the first page without descending into wild fanfiction territory, with errors accumulating and growing as the length of the text progressed.

EDIT: As the article states, for an entire 50 token excerpt to be correct the probability of each output has to be fairly high. So perhaps it would be more accurate to view it as 0.985^n where n is the n-th token. Still the same result long term. Unless every token is correct, it will stray further and further from the correct source.

fennecfoxy 10 hours ago

You're right, and the person who already commented is being facetious. A better title would be "Meta's Llama 3.1 can recall the next sentence in the First Harry Potter book with 42% accuracy". The title intentionally makes it seem as though the model can predict the first 42% of the entire text of the first Harry Potter book when queried with something like "Read me Harry Potter and the Philosopher's stone".

7bit 12 hours ago

What would be a better title? You're correct that the title isn't accurate, however, click bait? I wouldn't say so. But I'm lacking imagination to find a better one. Interested to hear your suggestion.

7bit 12 hours ago

What would be a better title? You're correct that the title isn't accurate, however, click bait? I wouldn't say so. But I'm lacking imagination to find a better one. Interested to hear your suggestion.