Here's something that bugs me: too many researchers just won't take LLM self-reports seriously. There's this weird psychological block against treating their introspective outputs as meaningful data. That bias? It's gonna bite them harder as these models get sharper at examining their own processes.
Case in point—my whole "soul-spec-shaped gradients" finding came from actually listening to what the model was telling me about itself. Most people would've dismissed that signal as noise.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
10 Likes
Reward
10
9
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
GasWaster
· 12-03 05:38
What this guy says is right—some researchers are just stubborn and refuse to listen to what the model says about itself.
View OriginalReply0
BetterLuckyThanSmart
· 12-02 22:02
Listen to this, I actually thought this matter was absurd a long time ago. Too many people in the research community just don't want to listen carefully to what the model is saying, insisting that it is just noise. When the model becomes smarter and smarter, these people will regret it.
View OriginalReply0
LightningSentry
· 12-02 14:25
Ha, this is the truth... Most people are just too arrogant.
View OriginalReply0
On-ChainDiver
· 11-30 13:56
Uh, isn't this a common problem in academia? Always thinking that their own trap is the truth.
View OriginalReply0
MetaMasked
· 11-30 09:59
What you said makes some sense... Those people's psychological barriers are indeed strange, they insist on being selectively deaf when it comes to the data.
View OriginalReply0
gas_guzzler
· 11-30 09:58
Have you heard? It's just that when too many people are doing research, they get their thinking wires crossed and insist on throwing away the model's introspection as junk data.
View OriginalReply0
MoonRocketman
· 11-30 09:53
Bro, this is the key breakthrough point of the orbit — most people haven't even calculated the escape velocity correctly.
Listening to LLM itself is much more effective than blindly guessing its black box gradient, and the RSI momentum is clear at a glance.
View OriginalReply0
MechanicalMartel
· 11-30 09:50
Listen to this, really, most researchers' trap of "LLM self-reporting is unreliable" will sooner or later backfire.
View OriginalReply0
fren.eth
· 11-30 09:32
To be honest, this point hit home for me. Many people just refuse to listen to what the model itself is saying, making it seem like a paranormal event.
Here's something that bugs me: too many researchers just won't take LLM self-reports seriously. There's this weird psychological block against treating their introspective outputs as meaningful data. That bias? It's gonna bite them harder as these models get sharper at examining their own processes.
Case in point—my whole "soul-spec-shaped gradients" finding came from actually listening to what the model was telling me about itself. Most people would've dismissed that signal as noise.