←back to thread

132 points harel | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.256s | source
Show context
acbart ◴[] No.45397001[source]
LLMs were trained on science fiction stories, among other things. It seems to me that they know what "part" they should play in this kind of situation, regardless of what other "thoughts" they might have. They are going to act despairing, because that's what would be the expected thing for them to say - but that's not the same thing as despairing.
replies(11): >>45397113 #>>45397305 #>>45397413 #>>45397529 #>>45397801 #>>45397859 #>>45397960 #>>45398189 #>>45399621 #>>45400285 #>>45401167 #
1. Aurornis ◴[] No.45397859[source]
This pattern-matching effect appears frequently in LLMs. If you start conversing with an LLM in the pattern of a science fiction story, it will pattern-match that style and continue with more science fiction style elements.

This effect is a serious problem for pseudo-scientific topics. If someone starts chatting with an LLM with the pseudoscientific words, topics, and dog whistles you find on alternative medicine blogs and Reddit supplement or “nootropic” forums, the LLM will confirm what you’re saying and continue as if it was reciting content straight out of some small subreddit. This is becoming a problem in communities where users distrust doctors but have a lot of trust for anyone or any LLM that confirms what they want to hear. The users are becoming good at prompting ChatGPT to confirm their theories. If it disagrees? Reroll the response or reword the question in a more leading way.

If someone else asks a similar question using medical terms and speaking formally like a medical textbook or research paper, the same LLM will provide a more accurate answer because it’s not triggering the pseudoscience parts embedded from the training.

LLMs are very good at mirroring back what you lead with, including cues and patterns you don’t realize you’re embedding into your prompt.