News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

dberenstein1957

A cool alternative reaching 2.5x speedup is https://github.com/huggingface/flux-fast

Show HN: Leading LLMs recognise bias but also reproduce harmful stereotypes

https://www.giskard.ai/knowledge/llms-recognise-bias-but-also-reproduce-harmful-stereotypes

We released new findings from our Phare LLM Benchmark on bias in leading language models. Instead of traditional "fill-in-the-blank" tests, we had 17 leading LLMs generate thousands of stories, then asked them to judge their own patterns.In short: Leading LLMs can recognise bias but also reproduce harmful stereotypes

( Read More... | no comments | 2 points | on HN )

Show HN: Phare: A Safety Probe for Large Language Models

https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.11365

We've just published a benchmark and accompanying paper on arXiv that challenges conventional leaderboard-driven LLM evaluation.Phare focuses on factual reliability, prompt sensitivity, multilingual support, and how models handle false premises like issues that actually matter when you're building serious applications.Some insights:- Preference scores ≠ factual correctness.- Framing effects can...

( Read More... | no comments | 2 points | on HN )
Optimisations are widely applied and can reduce inference time, but their impact on quality often remains unclear, so we decided to challenge the status quo and create our own optimised version of FLUX.1[dev] called FLUX-juiced.
One thing we are considering is expanding the dataset with more synthetic examples per example across the taxonomies using the the real-life annotated examples.
I'm David from Giskard, and we work on securing Agents. Today, we are announcing RealHarm: a dataset of real-world problematic interactions with AI agents, drawn from publicly reported incidents. Most of the research on AI harms is focused on theoretical risks or regulatory guidelines. But the real-world failure modes are often different—and much messier. With RealHarm, we collected and annotated hundreds of incidents involving deployed language models, using an evidence-based taxonomy for understanding and addressing the AI risks. We did so by analyzing the cases through the lens of deployers—the companies or teams actually shipping LLMs—and we found some surprising results: Reputational damage was the most common organizational harm.

Misinformation and hallucination were the most frequent hazards

State-of-the-art guardrails have failed to catch many of the incidents. We hope this dataset can help researchers, developers, and product teams better understand, test, and prevent real-world harms. The paper and dataset: https://realharm.giskard.ai/

We'd love feedback, questions, or suggestions—especially if you're deploying LLMs and have real harmful scenarios.

Re:From Books to Knowledge Graphs on Tuesday March 14, 2023 @06:22PM (#35159901)
Lovely, for me coreference resolution also is a huge issue. I created this package (https://github.com/Pandora-Intelligence/crosslingual-corefer...) which is currently the only viable solution to do coref resolution in Dutch and some other low-resource language.

Also, if you want to scale, LLMs are going to prove to expensive, so eventually data need to be logged somewhere to create a fine-tuned model that can do sub-tasks and ideally do them better. What do you think?