-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 390
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
BOUNTY: Build and document the first SOB (Supreme Oversight Board) #149
Comments
Bias as a ProblemRunning three same models with the same prompt would move the goalpost of hallucinations to the prompt, having the three of them biased in the same way, it would sure capture hallucinations that you'd catch with sampling the seed function, but this approach is limited in the most abstract forms a gaggle of board members would agree to nonsense. The N prompts should say the same core ideas but worded completely differently, and justified from currents of knowledge as orthogonal between themselves as possible (this is a very difficult task that should be abridged by a professional in history of philosophy or ontology, that writes the guidelines on evaluating the orthogonality between prompts). That or run N very differently trained models with the same prompt, and have them primed to find errors in their peers. The Virtue of Discussion.The SOB should not hallucinate, but also shouldn't have agreeing being a given thing, discussion is a mechanism that: 1- Restrains the expense of resources: Having a resource optimization and utilitarism focused board member in the SOB would help capture problems like these, but having all members biased in the same way may be disastrous. TLDROrthogonal models together cover more space with less effort: "El que mucho abarca, poco aprieta" |
When thinking about decisions, it could make sense to make sure that the first input has as much quality as possible as; "low quality input = low quality output". When thinking about the initial input, it could be cool to have some sort of prompt input structure/format where an initial prompt itself has to fulfill some specific requirements, ensuring that enough qualitative input is provided. The SOB actions therefore could be enhanced to:
In a Nutshell: |
I think the introduction of a refinement of user requests pipeline would be wise to introduce as a pre-formatting step and perhaps as a post-processing step as the board determines directives to assign to agents. I'll leave some links to interesting possible integrations -- I might be able/interested to handle some of them myself, so I'd be interested in both how to claim bounties and approximate $ value of said bounties so I can prioritize appropriately with my other gigs. there are probably more but that's what comes to mind off the top of my head -- perhaps it's wise to split this bounty up into sub-bounties for integrations/add bounties to integrations the community decides are useful? |
Directive: Build, test, and document the first instance of a SOB
General ideas:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: