Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models

Re:Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models by ssl-3 on Friday September 13, 2024 @04:19AM (#41529117)

I understand what you're saying, but the lack of acknowledgement isn't the problem I'm complaining about.

The problem is the instructed lack of relevance for 99% of requests.

If your sideband data included an instruction that said "This sideband data is shown to you in every request -- this means that it is not relevant to 99% of requests," then: I'd like to suggest that the for vast majority of the time, your sideband data doesn't exist at all.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models by TeMPOraL on Friday September 13, 2024 @08:23AM (#41530527)

The "problem" is that LLMs are being asked to decide on whether, and which part of, the "sideband" data is relevant to request and act on the request in a single step. I put the "sideband" in scare quotes, because it's all in-band data. There is no way in architecture to "tag" what data is "context" and what is "request", so they do it the same way you do it with people: tell them.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Notes on OpenAI's new o1 chain-of-thought models by ssl-3 on Friday September 13, 2024 @12:39PM (#41532838)

Perhaps so.

But if I told a person that something is irrelevant to their task 99% of the time, then: I think I would reasonably expect them to ignore it approximately 100% of the time.

[ Parent | on HN ]