Right. I mispoke, "training" may not be the right word. But my understanding is 
they have humans monitoring at least some of the ChatGPT usage and using it for RL. I 
have no idea what the frequency of the feedback is, though. I speculate that it was much 
faster early on, when they effectively took it offline for most people.

So, whether one's little online demonstration of the chat toolchain telling you 
what you want to hear impacts the RL is an open question. Shirley, the 2+2=5 
lessons are ignored by the RL workflow.

On 3/1/23 09:08, Marcus Daniels wrote:
It is pre-trained.   Just because there is a chat doesn’t mean it considers the 
correspondent as providing new evidence.

*From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Gillian Densmore
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 1, 2023 9:05 AM
*To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com>
*Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Magic Harry Potter mirrors or more?

Glen Funny you say that about chat gpt:

https://twitter.com/tasty_gigabyte7/status/1620571251344551938 
<https://twitter.com/tasty_gigabyte7/status/1620571251344551938>

On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 10:02 AM Marcus Daniels <mar...@snoutfarm.com 
<mailto:mar...@snoutfarm.com>> wrote:

    On one hand, there needs to be ongoing debate (in training) to reflect 
actual uncertainty in responses.   One the other hand, humans spew a lot of 
nonsense, and a lot of it is just wrong.  That leads to the vulnerability to 
black hatters.  If there is bias in the (peer) review of the input data, there 
will be bias in the output distributions.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com <mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>> 
On Behalf Of glen
    Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 8:51 AM
    To: friam@redfish.com <mailto:friam@redfish.com>
    Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Magic Harry Potter mirrors or more?

    Exactly. We recently started a rough eval of the newer "text-embedding-ada-002" model 
versus the older "text-similarity-curie-001" model. The newer model produces a lower 
dimensional embedding (1536) than the older (4096), which could imply the older model might provide 
a more fine-grained [dis]similarity. I don't think that's the case, though, because the encoding 
for the new model allows for 8192 tokens and the old one only 2046 tokens. So, the ability of the 
high dimensional embedding is limited by the granularity of the encoding. We're not done with the 
evaluation yet, though.

    One of the ideas I had when chatgpt took off, more along the lines of 
EricS' question, is to focus on red-teaming GPT. OpenAI's already doing this 
with their human-in-the-loop RL workflow. And the good faith skeptics in the 
world are publishing the edge cases they find (e.g. teaching GPT to say 2+2=5). 
But if a black hatter gets a backdoor into a *medically* focused app, she could 
really screw up particular domains (e.g. caregiver demographics, patient 
demographics, etc.). Or, if she were anti-corporate, she could screw up the 
interface between insurance companies and medical care.

    On 3/1/23 08:33, Marcus Daniels wrote:
     > It seems to me the "mansplaining" is built into an algorithm that 
chooses the most likely response.  Choose all responses above probability 0.9 and present 
them all to give the user a sense of the uncertainty.
     >
     > -----Original Message-----
     > From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com 
<mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>> On Behalf Of glen
     > Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 8:31 AM
     > To: friam@redfish.com <mailto:friam@redfish.com>
     > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Magic Harry Potter mirrors or more?
     >
     > Yep, that's the fundamental problem with the "chat" usage pattern. But it's much less of a 
problem with other usage patterns. For example, we have a project at UCSF where we're using GPT3.5 to help us 
with the embeddings for full text biomedical articles. This produces opportunities for several other usage 
patterns that preserve the inherent uncertainty, allowing the user to both gain some new insight without the 
"mansplaining" confidence of the chat mode. We're way upstream of the clinic so far, though. FDA 
approval for such a "device" might be sticky.
     >
     > On 3/1/23 08:19, Barry MacKichan wrote:
     >> When I bought back my company about 25 years ago, the mantra for 
programmers was “Google the error message!” Now ChatGPT will write some of the code 
for you. The job of programming still requires a lot of knowledge and experience 
since using ChatGPT-generated code without quality checking is far from failsafe.
     >>
     >> —Barry
     >>
     >> On 1 Mar 2023, at 11:04, Marcus Daniels wrote:
     >>
     >>      I have seen doctors run internet searches in front of me. If a LLM 
is given all the medical journals, biology textbooks, and hospital records for 
training, that could be a useful resource for society.
     >>
     >>      -----Original Message-----
     >>      From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com 
<mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>> On Behalf Of Santafe
     >>      Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 4:45 AM
     >>      To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com 
<mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
     >>      Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Magic Harry Potter mirrors or more?
     >>
     >>      This is fun. Will have to watch it when I have time.
     >>
     >>      Is there a large active genre just now combining ChatGPT wiht 
deepfakes, to generate video of whomeever-saying-whatever?
     >>
     >>      I was thinking a couple of years ago about what direction in 
big-AI would be the most distructive, in requiring extra cognitive load to check what 
was coming in through every sense channel all the time. Certainly, as much as we must 
live by habit, because doing everything through the prefrontal cortex all the time is 
exhausting (go to a strange country, wake up in the middle of the night, where are 
the lightswitches in this country and how do they work?), there clearly are whole 
sensory modalities that we have just taken for granted as long as we could. I have 
assumed that the audiovisual channel of watching a person say something was near the 
top of that list.
     >>
     >>      Clearly a few years ago, deepfakes suddenly took laziness off the 
table for that channel. The one help was that human-generated nonsense still takes 
human time, on which there is some limit.
     >>
     >>      But if we have machine-generated nonsense, delivered through 
machine-generated rendering, we can put whole servers onto it full-time. Sort of like 
bitcoin mining. Burn a lot of irreplaceable carbon fuel to generate something of no 
value and some significant social cost.
     >>
     >>      So I assume there is some component of the society that is bored 
and already doing this (?)
     >>
     >>      Eric
     >>
     >>
     >>          On Feb 28, 2023, at 9:10 PM, Gillian Densmore <gil.densm...@gmail.com 
<mailto:gil.densm...@gmail.com>> wrote:
     >>
     >>          This john oliver piece might either amus, and or mortify you.
     >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqa8Zo2XWc4&ab_channel=LastWeekTonight 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqa8Zo2XWc4&ab_channel=LastWeekTonight> 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqa8Zo2XWc4&ab_channel=LastWeekTonight 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqa8Zo2XWc4&ab_channel=LastWeekTonight>>
     >>
     >>          On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 4:00 PM Gillian Densmore 
<gil.densm...@gmail.com <mailto:gil.densm...@gmail.com>> wrote:
     >>
     >>
     >>          On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 2:06 PM Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net 
<mailto:j...@cas-group.net>> wrote:
     >>          The "Transformer" movies are like the "Resident evil" movies based on a similar 
idea: we take a simple, almost primitive story such as "cars that can transform into alien robots" or "a 
bloody fight against a zombie apocalypse" and throw lots of money at it.
     >>
     >>          But maybe deep learning and large language models are the 
same: we take a simple idea (gradient descent learning for deep neural networks) and 
throw lots of money (and data) at it. In this sense transformer is a perfect name of 
the architecture, isn't it?
     >>
     >>          -J.
     >> 😁😍🖖👍🤔
     >>
     >>          -------- Original message --------
     >>          From: Gillian Densmore <gil.densm...@gmail.com 
<mailto:gil.densm...@gmail.com>>
     >>          Date: 2/28/23 1:47 AM (GMT+01:00)
     >>          To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
     >>          <friam@redfish.com <mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
     >>          Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Magic Harry Potter mirrors or more?
     >>
     >>          Transformer architecture works because it's cybertronian 
technology. And is so advanced as to be almost magic.
     >>
     >>          On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 3:51 PM Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net 
<mailto:j...@cas-group.net>> wrote:
     >>          Terrence Sejnowski argues that the new AI super chatbots are like a magic Harry 
Potter mirror that tells the user what he wants to hear: "When people discover the mirror, it seems 
to provide truth and understanding. But it does not. It shows the deep-seated desires of anyone who 
stares into it". ChatGPT, LaMDA, LLaMA and other large language models would "take in our words 
and reflect them back to us".
     >> https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/26/technology/ai-chatbot-information-t 
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/26/technology/ai-chatbot-information-t> 
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/26/technology/ai-chatbot-information-t 
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/26/technology/ai-chatbot-information-t>>
     >>          ruth.html
     >>
     >>          It is true that large language models have absorbed 
unimaginably huge amount of texts, but what if our prefrontal cortex in the brain 
works in the same way?
     >> https://direct.mit.edu/neco/article/35/3/309/114731/Large-Language-Mod 
<https://direct.mit.edu/neco/article/35/3/309/114731/Large-Language-Mod> 
<https://direct.mit.edu/neco/article/35/3/309/114731/Large-Language-Mod 
<https://direct.mit.edu/neco/article/35/3/309/114731/Large-Language-Mod>>
     >>          els-and-the-Reverse-Turing-Test
     >>
     >>          I think it is possible that the "transformer" architecture is 
so
     >>          successful because it is - like the cortical columns in the 
neocortex
     >>          - a modular solution for the problem what comes next in an
     >>          unpredictable world https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortical_column 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortical_column> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortical_column 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortical_column>>
     >>
     >>          -J.
     >>


--
ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ

-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Reply via email to