[HN Gopher] Detecting hallucinations in large language models us...
___________________________________________________________________
Detecting hallucinations in large language models using semantic
entropy
Author : Tomte
Score : 41 points
Date : 2024-06-23 18:32 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nature.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nature.com)
| MikeGale wrote:
| One formulation is that these are hallucinations. Another is that
| these systems are "orthogonal to truth". They have nothing to do
| with truth or falsity.
|
| One expression of that idea is in this paper:
| https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5
| soist wrote:
| It's like asking if a probability distribution is truthful or a
| liar. It's a category error to speak about algorithms as if
| they had personal characteristics.
| kreeben wrote:
| Your linked paper suffers from the same anthropomorphisation as
| does all papers who uses the word "hallucination".
| more_corn wrote:
| This is huge though not a hundred percent there.
| jostmey wrote:
| So, I can understand how their semantic entropy (which seems to
| require a LLM trained to detect semantic equivalence) might be
| better at catching hallucinations. However, I don't see how
| semantic equivalence directly tackles the problem of
| hallucinations. Currently, I naively suspect it is just a
| heuristic for catching hallucinations. Furthermore, the
| requirement of a second LLM trained at detecting semantic
| equivalence to catch these events seems like an unnecessary
| pipeline. If I had a dataset of semantic equivalence to train a
| second LLM, I would directly incorporate this into the training
| process of my primary LLM, which to me, seems like the way things
| are done with deep learning
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-06-23 23:00 UTC)