←back to thread

454 points nathan-barry | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
kibwen ◴[] No.45645307[source]
To me, the diffusion-based approach "feels" more akin to whats going on in an animal brain than the token-at-a-time approach of the in-vogue LLMs. Speaking for myself, I don't generate words one a time based on previously spoken words; I start by having some fuzzy idea in my head and the challenge is in serializing it into language coherently.
replies(14): >>45645350 #>>45645383 #>>45645401 #>>45645402 #>>45645509 #>>45645523 #>>45645607 #>>45645665 #>>45645670 #>>45645891 #>>45645973 #>>45647491 #>>45648578 #>>45652892 #
ma2rten ◴[] No.45645523[source]
Interpretability research has found that Autoregressive LLMs also plan ahead what they are going to say.
replies(2): >>45645712 #>>45646027 #
aidenn0 ◴[] No.45645712[source]
This seems likely just from the simple fact that they can reliably generate contextually correct sentences in e.g. German Imperfekt.
replies(3): >>45651812 #>>45651822 #>>45653730 #
treis ◴[] No.45651822{3}[source]
I don't think you're wrong but I don't think your logic holds up here. If you have a literal translation like:

I have a hot dog _____

The word in the blank is not necessarily determined when the sentenced is started. Several verbs fit at the end and the LLM doesn't need to know which it's going to pick when it starts. Each word narrows down the possibilities:

I - Trillions Have - Billions a - millions hot - thousands dog - dozens _____ - Could be eaten, cooked, thrown, whatever.

If it chooses cooked at this point that doesn't necessarily mean that the LLM was going to do that when it chose "I" or "have"

replies(1): >>45652378 #
1. aidenn0 ◴[] No.45652378{4}[source]
That's why I hedged with "seems likely" and added "in context." If this is in the middle of a paragraph, then there are many fewer options to fit in the blank from the very start.