Here’s a good & readable summary paper to pin your critiques on

  • jaden
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    I suspect that arises from a sort of adversarial or autoregressive interplay btw areas of the brain. I do observe early teens displaying very low metacognition around accuracy of what they say. It’s a true stereotype that they will pick an argument almost arbitrarily and parrot talking points from online. I imagine that if llms can do that, they might just need an RLHF training flow that mirrors stuff like arguing for BS with your parents or experiencing failure as a result of misinformation. That’s why I think it’s a matter of instruction fine-tuning rather than some fundamental attribute of LLMs.

    It’s probably part of developmental instincts in humans to develop better metacognition by going through an argumentative phase like that.