Re:YC is wrong about LLMs for chip design
by edmundsauto on Saturday November 16, 2024 @01:10PM
(#42157907)
Only if it fails in the same way. LLMs and the multi-agent approach operate under the assumption that they are programmable agents and each agent is more of a trade off against failure modes. If you can string them together, and if the output is easily verified, it can be a great fit for the problem.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:YC is wrong about LLMs for chip design
by astrange on Sunday November 17, 2024 @04:48AM
(#42163127)
If you're going to do that you need completely different LLMs to base the agents on. The ones I've tried have "mode collapse" - ask them to emulate different agents and they'll all end up behaving the same way. Simple example, if you ask it to write different stories they'll usually end up having the same character names.
Re:YC is wrong about LLMs for chip design
by edmundsauto on Monday November 18, 2024 @12:16AM
(#42169897)
It may depend on the domain. I tend to use LLMs for things that are less open ended, more categorization and summarization response than pure novel creation.
In these situations, I’ve been able to sufficiently program the agent that I haven’t seen too much of an issue as you described. Consistency is a feature.