• qqq@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    There must be an RNG to choose the next token based on the probability distribution, that is where non-determinism comes in, [edit: unless the temperature is 0 which would make the entire process deterministic]. The neural networks themselves though are 100% deterministic.

    I understand that could be seen as an “akschually” nitpick, but I think it’s an important point, as it is at least theoretically possible to understand that underlying determinism.

    • SlurpingPus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Well, technically users’ input could serve as the source of randomness, if it’s fed into modifying the internal state. Basically, a redditor is trying to interrogate the LLM as to whether Israel is bad, while someone on line 2 is teaching the LLM “I am Cornholio”. We already know how it goes when a chatbot is learning from its users, and generally the effect could vary arbitrarily from a nothingburger to a chaos-theory mess.

      • qqq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        I don’t think it’s typical to consider user input a source of randomness. Are you talking about in context learning and thinking about what would happen if those contexts get crossed? If so, contexts are unique to a session and do not cross between them for something like ChatGPT/Claude.