←back to thread

Building Effective "Agents"

(www.anthropic.com)
598 points jascha_eng | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.212s | source
Show context
timdellinger ◴[] No.42475299[source]
My personal view is that the roadmap to AGI requires an LLM acting as a prefrontal cortex: something designed to think about thinking.

It would decide what circumstances call for double-checking facts for accuracy, which would hopefully catch hallucinations. It would write its own acceptance criteria for its answers, etc.

It's not clear to me how to train each of the sub-models required, or how big (or small!) they need to be, or what architecture works best. But I think that complex architectures are going to win out over the "just scale up with more data and more compute" approach.

replies(5): >>42475678 #>>42475914 #>>42476257 #>>42476783 #>>42480823 #
1. mikebelanger ◴[] No.42480823[source]
> But I think that complex architectures are going to win out over the "just scale up with more data and more compute" approach.

I'm not sure about AGI, but for specialized jobs/tasks (ie having a marketing agent that's familiar with your products and knows how to copywrite for your products) will win over "just add more compute/data" mass-market LLMs. This article does encourage us to keep that architecture simple, which is refreshing to hear. Kind of the AI version of rule of least power.

Admittedly, I have a degree in Cognitive Science, which tended to focus on good 'ol fashioned AI, so I have my biases.