• @chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    025 days ago

    that is not the … available outcome.

    It demonstrably is already though. Paste a document in, then ask questions about its contents; the answer will typically take what’s written there into account. Ask about something you know is in a Wikipedia article that would have been part of its training data, same deal. If you think it can’t do this sort of thing, you can just try it yourself.

    Obviously it can handle simple sums, this is an illustrative example

    I am well aware that LLMs can struggle especially with reasoning tasks, and have a bad habit of making up answers in some situations. That’s not the same as being unable to correlate and recall information, which is the relevant task here. Search engines also use machine learning technology and have been able to do that to some extent for years. But with a search engine, even if it’s smart enough to figure out what you wanted and give you the correct link, that’s useless if the content behind the link is only available to institutions that pay thousands a year for the privilege.

    Think about these three things in terms of what information they contain and their capacity to convey it:

    • A search engine

    • Dataset of pirated contents from behind academic paywalls

    • A LLM model file that has been trained on said pirated data

    The latter two each have their pros and cons and would likely work better in combination with each other, but they both have an advantage over the search engine: they can tell you about the locked up data, and they can be used to combine the locked up data in novel ways.

    • @funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      225 days ago

      the problem is you can’t take those weaknesses and call it “academic” - it’s a contradiction in terms.

      When a real academic makes up answers its a problem, when chatgpt does it its part of the expectation.