Profile picture drawn by Paws and Claws and licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Sharealike 4.0 International license(cc-by-sa 4.0)
currently migrating my main account to anise@quokk.au
Profile picture drawn by Paws and Claws and licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Sharealike 4.0 International license(cc-by-sa 4.0)
currently migrating my main account to anise@quokk.au
as I said, the text has a 0% error rate about the contents of the text, which is what the LLM is summarising, and to which it adds it's own error rate. Then you read that and add your error rate.
can we???
why… would I want that? I read novels because I like reading novels? I also think that on summaries LLMs are especially bad, since there is no distinction between "important" and "unimportant" in the architecture. The point of a summary is to only get the important points, so it clashes.
no LLM can do this. LLMs are notoriously bad at doing any analysis of this kind of style element because of their architecture. why would you pick this example
I still have not seen any evidence for this, and it still does not adress the point that the summary would be pretty much unreadable