←back to thread

248 points rishicomplex | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
sega_sai ◴[] No.42167962[source]
I think the interface of LLM with formalized languages is really the future. Because here you can formally verify every statement and deal with hallucinations.
replies(9): >>42168164 #>>42168732 #>>42168855 #>>42169086 #>>42169255 #>>42169394 #>>42169686 #>>42171742 #>>42176215 #
nybsjytm ◴[] No.42169255[source]
If this were the case, I don't see why we'd need to wait for an AI company to make a breakthrough in math research. The key issue instead is how to encode 'real-life' statements in a formal language - which to me seems like a ludicrous problem, just complete magical thinking.

For example, how might an arbitrary statement like "Scholars believe that professional competence of a teacher is a prerequisite for improving the quality of the educational process in preschools" be put in a lean-like language? What about "The theoretical basis of the October Revolution lay in a development of Marxism, but this development occurred through three successive rounds of theoretical debate"?

Or have I totally misunderstood what people mean when they say that developments in automatic theorem proving will solve LLM's hallucination problem?

replies(5): >>42169803 #>>42170196 #>>42172147 #>>42172273 #>>42174396 #
1. ◴[] No.42172147[source]