Comment

Comment on Somebody managed to coax the Gab AI chatbot to reveal its prompt

<- View Parent

kromem@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

Yeah. LLMs learn in one of three ways:

Pretraining - millions of dollars to learn how to predict a massive training set as accurately as possible
Fine-tuning - thousands of dollars to take a pretrained model and bias the style and formatting of how it responds each time without needing in context alignments
In context - adding things to the prompt that gets processed, which is even more effective than fine tuning but requires sending those tokens each time there’s a request, so on high volume fine tuning can sometimes be cheaper

source

Sort:hotnew top

rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
I haven’t tried them yet but do LORAs (and all their variants) add a layer of learning concepts into LLMs like they do in image generators?

source
- kromem@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  People definitely do LoRA with LLMs. This was a great writeup on the topic from a while back.
  
  But I have a broader issue with a lot of discussion on LLMs these days, which is that community testing and evaluation of methods and approaches is typically done on smaller models due to cost, and I’m generally very skeptical as to the generalization of results in those cases to large models.
  
  Especially on top of the increased issues around Goodhart’s Law and how the industry is measuring LLM performance right now.
  
  Personally I prefer avoiding fine tuned models wherever possible and just working more on crafting longer constrained contexts for pretrained models with a pre- or post-processing layer to format requests and results in acceptable ways if needed (latency permitting, but things like Groq are fast enough this isn’t much of an issue).
  
  There’s a quality and variety that’s lost with a lot of the RLHF models these days (though getting better with the most recent batch like Claude 3 Opus).
  
  source
  - rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Thanks for the link! I actually use SD a lot practically so it’s been taking up like 95% of my attention in the AI space. I have LM Studio on my Mac and it blazes through responses with the 7b model and tends to meet most of my non-coding needs.
    
    Can you explain what you mean here?
    
    Personally I prefer avoiding fine tuned models wherever possible and just working more on crafting longer constrained contexts for pretrained models with a pre- or post-processing layer to format requests and results in acceptable ways if needed (latency permitting, but things like Groq are fast enough this isn’t much of an issue).
    
    Are you saying better initial prompting on a raw pre-trained model?
    
    source
    kromem@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Yeah. So with the pretrained models they aren’t instruct tuned so instead of “write an ad for a Coca Cola Twitter post emphasizing the brand focus of ‘enjoy life’” you need to do things that will work for autocompletion like:
    
    As an example of our top shelf social media copywriting services, consider the following Cleo winning tweet for the client Coca-Cola which emphasized their brand focus of “enjoy life”:
    
    In terms of the pre- and post-processing, you can use cheaper and faster models to just convert a query or response from formatting for the pretrained model into one that is more chat/instruct formatted. You can also check for and filter out jailbreaking or inappropriate content at those layers too.
    
    Basically the pretrained models are just much better at being more ‘human’ and unless what you are getting them to do is to complete word problems or the exact things models are optimized around currently (which I think poorly map to real world use cases), for a like to like model I prefer the pretrained.
    
    Though ultimately the biggest advantage is the overall model sophistication - a pretrained simpler and older model isn’t better than a chat/instruct tuned more modern larger model.
    
    source